A comparison of future realizations of the kilogram
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The definition of the kilogram in the International System of Units (SI) is expected to be revised in 2018. The present definition of the kilogram, the mass of the International Prototype of the Kilogram (IPK), adopted in 1889, would then be replaced by a definition based on a fixed numerical value of the Planck constant. The Consultative Committee for Mass and Related Quantities has requested that, as one of the essential steps before the redefinition, a comparison of kilogram realizations based on future realization methods, Kibble 9 balances and x-ray crystal density (XRCD) experiments, be organized. This comparison was carried out during 2016 in the form of a ‘Pilot Study’. One aim of the study was to determine the uniformity of mass dissemination after the redefinition by comparing mass calibrations based on different future realization experiments. Another aim was to test the continuity of the mass unit across the redefinition by comparing mass calibrations based on Kibble balances and XRCD experiments with those based on the IPK. This paper describes the organization of the comparison and presents its results.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".