SIM regional comparison of ac-dc current transfer difference SIM.EM-K12
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ac-dc current transfer difference identified as SIM.EM.K-12 began in July 2010 and was completed in September 2012. Six NMIs in the SIM region and one NMI in the AFRIMET region took part: NRC (Canada), NIST (United States of America), CENAM (Mexico), INTI (Argentina), UTE (Uruguay), INMETRO (Brazil) and NIS (Egypt). The comparisons were proposed to assess the measurement capabilities in ac-dc current transfer difference of the participants NMIs. The ac-dc current transfer differences of the travelling standard had been measured at 10 mA and 5 A at 10 Hz, 55 Hz, 1 kHz, 10 kHz, 20 kHz, 50 kHz and 100 kHz. The test points were selected to link the results with the equivalent CCEM Key Comparisons (CCEM-K12), through three NMIs participating in both SIM and CCEM key comparisons (INTI, NRC and NIST). The report shows the degree of equivalence in the SIM region and also the degree of equivalence with the corresponding CCEM reference value. The results of all participants support the values and uncertainties of the applicable CMC entries for ac-dc current transfer difference in the Key Comparison Database held at the BIPM. Main text. To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report. Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/. The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCEM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".