MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101313205 · doi:10.1002/bem.67

Magnetic field exposure and behavioral monitoring system

2001· article· en· W2101313205 on OpenAlexaff
Alex W. Thomas, Dick Drost, Frank S. Prato

Bibliographic record

VenueBioelectromagnetics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareLawson Health Research InstituteWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectromagnetic coilMagnetometerElectrical engineeringMagnetic fieldPhysicsAmplifierSearch coilOpticsAcousticsNuclear magnetic resonanceEngineeringMagnetic flux

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To maximize the availability and usefulness of a small magnetic field exposure laboratory, we designed a magnetic field exposure system that has been used to test human subjects, caged or confined animals, and cell cultures. The magnetic field exposure system consists of three orthogonal pairs of coils 2 m square x 1 m separation, 1.751 m x 0.875 m separation, and 1.5 m x 0.75 m separation. Each coil consisted of ten turns of insulated 8 gauge stranded copper conductor. Each of the pairs were driven by a constant-current amplifier via digital to analog (D/A) converter. A 9 pole zero-gain active Bessel low-pass filter (1 kHz corner frequency) before the amplifier input attenuated the expected high frequencies generated by the D/A conversion. The magnetic field was monitored with a 3D fluxgate magnetometer (0-3 kHz, +/- 1 mT) through an analog to digital converter. Behavioral monitoring utilized two monochrome video cameras (viewing the coil center vertically and horizontally), both of which could be video recorded and real-time digitally Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) encoded to CD-ROM. Human postural sway (standing balance) was monitored with a 3D forceplate mounted on the floor, connected to an analog to digital converter. Lighting was provided by 12 offset overhead dimmable fluorescent track lights and monitored using a digitally connected spectroradiometer. The dc resistance, inductance of each coil pair connected in series were 1.5 m coil (0.27 Omega, 1.2 mH), 1.75 m coil (0.32 Omega, 1.4 mH), and 2 m coil (0.38 Omega, 1.6 mH). The frequency response of the 1.5 m coil set was 500 Hz at +/- 463 microT, 1 kHz at +/- 232 microT, 150 micros rise time from -200 microT(pk) to + 200 microT(pk) (square wave) and is limited by the maximum voltage ( +/- 146 V) of the amplifier (Bessel filter bypassed).

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)0.001
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.010

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations11
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioelectromagneticsSame topicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological EffectsFrench-language works237,207