MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2588388647 · doi:10.1109/antem.2000.7851660

Evaluation of errors in modeling electromagnetic fields in the human body at low frequencies

2000· article· en· W2588388647 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor W. Dawson, M.E. Potter, M.A. Stuchly

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectromagnetic fieldElectric fieldBiomagnetismExcitationComputationMagnetic fieldPhysicsComputer scienceComputational physicsAcousticsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last decade computations of electric fields induced in realistic heterogeneous models of the human body have been performed for exposures to electric or magnetic fields of very low frequencies, typically 50 or 60 Hz. The results of these simulations are often relied on to prevent exposures to levels that elicit undesirable biological effects. For instance, neural excitation is well known to depend on the electric field in tissue and its spatial variation. We have in performed extensive modeling of such situation; such modeling has also been done in other laboratories. One of the parameters that is often used, specifically in the health protection guidelines is the induced current density in a small tissue volume.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectromagnetic Fields and Biological EffectsFrench-language works237,207