MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119839147 · doi:10.1109/19.918156

NRC-PTB intercomparison of voltage transformer calibration systems for high voltage at 60 Hz, 50 Hz, and 16.66 Hz

2001· article· en· W2119839147 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 Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Electrical Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVoltageCalibrationElectrical engineeringVoltage dividerResistive touchscreenPhysicsTransformerComparatorAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Materials scienceChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An intercomparison of voltage transformer (VT) calibration systems was performed at the PTB high-voltage laboratory. A "portable" current-comparator-based VT calibration system of the NRC was compared with the PTB voltage-divider-based system, using a reference multiratio inductive VT as a transfer standard with voltage ratios of (110/2 kV)/(100/2 V) up to (400//spl radic/3 kV)/(100//spl radic/3 V) at frequencies of 16.66 Hz, 50 Hz, and 60 Hz. At frequencies of 50 Hz and 60 Hz with a resistive burden of 10 k/spl Omega/ and test voltages of 20% up to 120% of rated voltage, the test results of the two different methods at all ratios were found to differ by no more than 15 parts in 10/sup 6/ for the voltage ratio and 30 /spl mu/rad for the phase displacement. For the ratio (110/2 kV)/(100/2 V) at 16.66 Hz, the results agreed within 15 parts in 10/sup 6/ for the voltage ratio and 50 /spl mu/rad for the phase displacement.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.218 · 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