Measurement of the Relative Free Radical Content of Insulating Oils of Petroleum Origin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oil/paper insulation degradation in transformers involves chemical and physical changes in the materials. Some of the chemical reactions involve very reactive intermediates called free radicals. Free radicals play a major role in a wide variety of ageing processes. The detection of these reactive species in oil may, in principle, provide useful information for monitoring oil degradation. This manuscript details a laboratory technique, which determines the relative content of free radicals in insulating oils of petroleum origin by a spectrophotometric method. Free radicals may be formed in oils under operating or test conditions. The procedure enables the determination of the relative concentration of free radicals, which can act as the precursors of decay products such as charge carriers, oxidized molecules, as well as polymerization products. The technique involves using a reactive free radical reagent, 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH), added to oil to assess free radical concentration. This method is applicable to new, reclaimed, or used oils as well as naturally or artificially oxidized oil (the cause of aging can be chemical, physical, or electrical). In this contribution, free radicals were assessed following electrical discharge application in oil.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".