Calculation of mutual inductance and magnetic force between two thick coaxial Bitter coils of rectangular cross section
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mutual inductance and magnetic force between coaxial Bitter coils with rectangular cross section were recently calculated by some authors using semi‐analytical expressions based on two integrations (Ren et al. ) and by using the Bessel function approach (Conway). In this study, these important electrical quantities are calculated using the analytical and semi‐analytical expressions based on elliptical integrals of the first and second kinds, Heuman's Lambda function, and two simple integrals with their kernel functions continuous on the whole integration interval. Simple Gaussian numerical integration is used. This method can be applied to calculate the mutual inductance and magnetic force between two thin Bitter disk coils (pancakes) as well as between two Bitter coils, where one has a rectangular cross section and the other is a thin disk (pancake). The calculations of the mutual inductances and magnetic forces are validated by comparison with values already published in the literature. The presented approach has advantages of high accuracy and low computational time.
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.
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 it