MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794277748 · doi:10.1088/0026-1394/53/1a/01002

SIM.EM-K3 Key comparison of 10 mH inductance standards at 1 kHz

2016· article· en· W2794277748 on OpenAlexaff
Jorge Moreno, M. Côté, Andrew D. Koffman, B I Castro, Renata de Barros e Vasconcellos, G. A. Kyriazis, Marcelo Cazabat, Daniel Izquierdo, Carlos Faverio, Daniel Slomovitz

Bibliographic record

VenueMetrologia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Electrical Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutual recognitionMetrologyKey (lock)InductanceComputer scienceMathematicsData miningAccountingInformation retrievalStatisticsElectrical engineeringEngineeringComputer securityBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A key comparison of 10 mH inductance standards at 1 kHz has been carried out with the participation of seven National Metrology Institutes of the Inter-American Metrology System, within the frame of the International Committee for Weights and Measures Mutual Recognition Arrangement (MRA), which was piloted by CENAM, Mexico. Three previously characterized commercial inductors, contained in individual enclosures with controlled temperature were used as traveling standards. This document presents the results and technical details of the comparison. Main text To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report . Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/ . The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCEM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0870.034

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMetrologiaSame topicAdvanced Electrical Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207