MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2783987647 · doi:10.1109/emc-b.2017.8260442

Evaluating hazards of lightning strike on stationary vehicles under overhead lines

2017· article· en· W2783987647 on OpenAlexaff
Moein Nazari, Ali Aghabarati, R. Moini, Simon Fortin, Yexu Li, F. Dawalibi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLightning and Electromagnetic Phenomena
Canadian institutionsSafe Engineering Services & Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLightning (connector)Lightning strikeTowerGroundChannel (broadcasting)Electrical conductorOverhead lineElectrical engineeringOverhead (engineering)Line (geometry)Transient (computer programming)EngineeringPower (physics)Marine engineeringStructural engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines safety concerns concerning persons touching a vehicle located near an overhead line hit by lightning. Two models of lightning strikes are assumed for the analysis. The first model includes the entire lightning channel and current distribution along the channel while the second model is a short channel of surge current injected directly at the top of the struck tower. In order to evaluate the effects of the lightning model on the shock hazard level, the transient current passing through the body of a person touching the vehicle is evaluated and compared to the case of a person touching directly the struck tower. An integral formulation of Maxwell's equations is used to model the whole structure including the vehicle, power line, towers, grounding network, and lightning channel. The vehicle is modeled as an array of metallic plates, while the remainder of the system is modeled as an array of wire mesh conductors. Computations are carried out using the Method of Moments (MoM) for surface-wire integral equation in a stratified medium. Results show that safety is affected more by the indirect radiation and induction effects of the lightning channel for the case of a person touching the vehicle than for the case of a person touching the struck tower.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.325
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLightning and Electromagnetic PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207