MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921710869 · doi:10.1109/tmag.2019.2899304

Deep Learning for Magnetic Field Estimation

2019· article· en· W2921710869 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Magnetics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Motor Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSolverGround truthTransformerElectromagnetic coilConvolutional neural networkDeep learningDropout (neural networks)Artificial intelligenceFinite element methodArtificial neural networkSynthetic dataEigenvalues and eigenvectorsProbabilistic logicMagnetNetwork topologyMachine learningPhysicsVoltage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the feasibility of novel data-driven deep learning (DL) models to predict the solution of Maxwell's equations for low-frequency electromagnetic (EM) devices. With ground truth (empirical evidence) data being generated from a finite-element analysis solver, a deep convolutional neural network is trained in a supervised manner to learn a mapping for magnetic field distribution for topologies of different complexities of geometry, material, and excitation, including a simple coil, a transformer, and a permanent magnet motor. Preliminary experiments show DL model predictions in close agreement with the ground truth. A probabilistic model is introduced to improve the accuracy and to quantify the uncertainty in the prediction, based on Monte Carlo dropout. This paper establishes a basis for a fast and generalizable data-driven model used in the analysis, design, and optimization of EM devices.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.196 · 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