MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081496857 · doi:10.1109/mia.2005.1524732

Power quality concerns and solutions

2005· article· en· W2081496857 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Industry Applications Magazine · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Quality and Harmonics
Canadian institutionsRockwell Automation (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmonicsBooster (rocketry)Pipeline (software)Rectifier (neural networks)EngineeringPower factorPower qualityElectrical engineeringPulse-width modulationCapacitorLimit (mathematics)Power (physics)Power system harmonicsTopology (electrical circuits)Electronic engineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringVoltagePhysicsMathematicsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pipeline project discussed in this article involved building a new 70-m, 24-in diameter section of a petroleum products pipeline stretch and investigates power issues on a 2,500-hp pipeline booster station adjustable frequency drive. AFDs were originally intended only to be for soft starting, not for continuous use. The active front-end topology uses PWM switching of the rectifier, as well as a reactor/capacitor on the input, to limit harmonics being generated back in to power system.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.572
Threshold uncertainty score0.706

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it