MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164234494 · doi:10.1109/tim.2008.2006966

KRISS-NRC Intercomparisons of Calibration Systems for Instrument Transformers With Many Different Ratios at Power Frequency

2008· article· en· W2164234494 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jae Kap Jung, E. So, Young Tae Park, Myung Soo Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Electrical Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersKorea Research Institute of Standards and Science
KeywordsCurrent transformerElectrical engineeringCalibrationTransformerVoltageAnalytical Chemistry (journal)High voltageNuclear engineeringEngineeringPhysicsChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An intercomparison of the calibration systems for instrument transformers between the Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science (KRISS) and the National Research Council of Canada (NRC), with many different ratios at 60 Hz, was performed using six portable transfer standards. The portable transfer standards consist of two current transformers (CTs) with current ratios of 5 A/5 A up to 20 000 A/5 A and four voltage transformers (VTs) with voltage ratios of 110 V/110 V up to 66 000 V/110 V. The comparison results for the CT calibration systems between the two institutes are in good agreement within 10times10-6for ratio and 10 murad for phase for all the current ratios. The comparison results for the VT test systems also indicated good agreement within 35times10-6for ratio and 35 murad for phase for all voltage ratios.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.234
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 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

Citations16
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and MeasurementSame topicAdvanced Electrical Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207