MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101257371 · doi:10.1109/isemc.1990.252772

Characterization of an electrostatic discharge tester

2002· article· en· W2101257371 on OpenAlexaff
A.J. Kozlowski, M. Barski, S.S. Stuchly

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic Compatibility · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectrostatic Discharge in Electronics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersInstituto de Telecomunicações
KeywordsElectrostatic dischargeWaveformAmplitudeVoltageElectric fieldElectrical engineeringPartial dischargeBrush dischargeIntensity (physics)Cutoff frequencyMaterials scienceCutoffSpark gapPhysicsAcousticsOpticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The experimental characteristics of a commercial electrostatic discharge (ESD) tester operating in air discharge mode are reported. Specifically, the discharge current and radiated electric field intensity of a KeyTek Corp. Series 2000 ESD Tester are measured using a Tektronix 7912HB (750 MHz bandwidth) voltage transient digitizer. The following discharge waveform parameters are considered: rise times and peak values in the time domain, and amplitude and low-pass cutoff frequency in the frequency domain. The 10%-to-90% rise times increased from 1.0 kV to about 15 kV, and then decreased for the discharge current and radiated electric field intensity. The measured peak values of the radiated field (over a copper ground plate) varied from about 50 V/m to about 200 V/m. The discharge current amplitude increased with increasing spark gap voltage, as did the radiated E-field intensity. However, the cutoff frequency of the radiated E-field decreased with increasing spark gap voltage.>

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE International Symposium on Electromagnetic CompatibilitySame topicElectrostatic Discharge in ElectronicsFrench-language works237,207