MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121159880 · doi:10.1109/elinsl.1994.401396

Influence of freon on charge density build-up in a solid insulator

2002· article· en· W2121159880 on OpenAlexaff
Salem M. Elkhodary, R. Hackam

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSemiconductor materials and devices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFreonAnalytical Chemistry (journal)VoltageInsulator (electricity)Saturation (graph theory)Materials scienceChemistryAtomic physicsElectrical engineeringPhysicsOptoelectronicsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The charge generation at the surface of and within an acrylic glass spacer was measured using a capacitive probe in freon as a function of gas pressure and the level, duration and polarity of a dc applied voltage. Typically the rate of charge build up increased with increasing gas pressure from 0.174 /spl mu/C/m/sup 2//s at 0.1 MPa to 0.97 /spl mu/C/m/sup 2//s at 0.4 MPa a fixed applied voltage of 80 kV. At a fixed gas pressure of 0.1 MPa the charge build up increased from 2.6/spl times/10/sup -3/ /spl mu/C/m/sup 2//s at 2 kV to 174/spl times/10/sup -3/ /spl mu/C/m/sup 2//s at 80 kV. The saturated charge density increased linearly with increasing voltage from 1.3 /spl mu/C/m/sup 2/ at 2 kV to 61.2 /spl mu/C/m/sup 2/ at 80 kV, for 0.1 MPa. The charging current was also monitored and found to decrease rapidly with increasing time until saturation is reached. The saturated current increased, at a fixed pressure, with increasing voltage. It also increased with increasing pressure at a fixed applied voltage. The observed charge build up is governed by the total surface and volume resistances of the insulator.>

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSemiconductor materials and devicesFrench-language works237,207