MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2122007213 · doi:10.1109/mper.2002.4312094

Analysis of Grounding Systems in Soils with Finite Volumes of Different Resistivities

2002· article· en· W2122007213 on OpenAlexaff
Jianjun Ma, F. Dawalibi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Power Engineering Review · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicElectromagnetic Scattering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSafe Engineering Services & Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodGroundSoil waterFinite volume methodRange (aeronautics)Simple (philosophy)Boundary value problemBoundary (topology)Process (computing)Applied mathematicsGeotechnical engineeringMathematicsMathematical analysisGeologyComputer scienceEngineeringMechanicsSoil scienceStructural engineeringPhysicsElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A theoretical model for the analysis of grounding systems located in soils with finite volumes of arbitrary resistivities is presented. The boundary element method is used for the analysis. The procedures in the analysis are described in detail and the essential equations are presented. Analytical and numerical validations are also carried out in the process. The results obtained using the new approach are in agreement with well-known simple case results and converge asymptotically to the uniform soil case. There is a wide range of practical grounding system scenarios that can be accurately modeled by using this new soil type. Examples showing several finite volume soil models are also presented.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations68
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Power Engineering ReviewSame topicElectromagnetic Scattering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207