MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2330975326 · doi:10.1541/ieejias.122.871

Trial Manufacture and Characteristics Evaluation of a Device Using a Cylindrical Linear Induction Motor for Machine Tools

2002· article· en· W2330975326 on OpenAlexaff
Akiyuki Hirano, Naoki Maki, Yasuhiko Tanaka

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEJ Transactions on Industry Applications · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsAdidas (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinear motorPropulsionRippleLinear induction motorActuatorEngineeringElectromagnetic coilLinear actuatorEncoderEddy currentMechanical engineeringInduction motorAutomotive engineeringComputer scienceElectrical engineeringAerospace engineeringVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A cylindrical linear induction motor (CLIM) has no coil ends, and therefore it has higher propulsion force and power factor compared with a flat linear induction motor. The purpose of this study is to investigate of the application of CLIM to actuators of machine tools. First, a CLIM trial machine increasing effective flux and reducing eddy currents, which has good performance and simple structure, was manufactured. Next, a CLIM device for machine tools using the CLIM trial machine and commercially available accessories, such as a motor driver and a linear encoder, was manufactured and tested for practical application.From the test results, the effect of excitation frequency on propulsion force, the effect of velocity on the ripple of propulsion force and its positioning performance are clarified. It was also found that the device using the CLIM and commercially available accessories has enough potential performance to be used for the actuator of the practical machine tools.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEJ Transactions on Industry ApplicationsSame topicElectric Motor Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207