MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2135651185 · doi:10.24908/pceea.v0i0.3955

THE DESIGN OF DRILL ROD INTERFACES AND THEIR AUXILIARY MECHANISM DRIAM

2011· article· en· W2135651185 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Exploration and Technology
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityBrampton Civic Hospital
FundersMcGill University
KeywordsMechanism (biology)DrillDrill stringRodLock (firearm)Computer scienceMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the paper the design of the drill rod interfaces and their auxiliary mechanism (DRIAM) for space exploration systems is described. The DRIAM project is sub divided into 3 parts: the drill rod segment, the auxiliary mechanism, and the drill rod storage mechanism. This system is to be integrated into a Mars land rover. The short drill rod segments have locking mechanisms inside allowing them to lock to each other, thus forming a two-meter drill string. These rods are stored in a storage mechanism. The auxiliary mechanism translates segments between the storage mechanism and the drill string. The system has a total of five degrees-of-freedom: four active, where the auxiliary mechanism has three dof, and the storage mechanism has one, and one passive located in the drill rod segment activated by the auxiliary mechanism.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.590
Threshold uncertainty score0.380

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.155 · 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