MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318144281 · doi:10.1109/cpem.2014.6898234

Calibrations for resistance welding at high pulsed currents

2014· article· en· W2318144281 on OpenAlexaffabout
Branislav Djokić

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMagnetic Field Sensors Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRogowski coilCalibrationCoaxialWeldingCurrent (fluid)Materials scienceElectrical engineeringCoaxial cableNuclear engineeringAcousticsEngineeringMetallurgyComposite materialPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rogowski coils are widely used as high pulsed current sensors in resistance welding. Their operating conditions reflect on requirements for their calibration. A new calibration system has been developed at NRC Canada for calibrating current sensing coils and weld current monitors for AC resistance welding. The calibration system, which includes a high current source and a coaxial copper cage, has been evaluated at peak pulsed currents of up to 80 kA, at 60 Hz. The best expanded measurement uncertainties (k=2) have been estimated to be within 250 μA/A for magnitude and 175 μrad for phase.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMagnetic Field Sensors TechniquesFrench-language works237,207