MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989470101 · doi:10.1139/cjce-2018-0114

Galloping response of sector-shape iced eight bundle conductors

2019· article· en· W2989470101 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mengqi Cai, Linshu Zhou, Qian Xu, Xiaohui Yang, Xiaohui Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicVibration and Dynamic Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Scholarship CouncilNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaElectric Power Research Institute
KeywordsConductorBundleElectrical conductorAerodynamicsStructural engineeringWind tunnelFinite element methodSpan (engineering)Aerodynamic forceEngineeringMaterials scienceElectrical engineeringGeometryAerospace engineeringMathematicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wind tunnel test results of the aerodynamic coefficients of sector-shape iced eight bundle conductors varying with wind attack angles are presented. Then, by means of the user-defined cable elements, the aerodynamic loads are applied on the cable elements of each sub-conductor through the finite element method (FEM). In addition, the galloping responses of sector-shape iced eight bundle conductors are discussed. Finally, galloping responses, including dynamic responses (natural modes and frequencies), galloping orbits, and amplitudes of typical sector-shape iced eight bundle conductor transmission lines in the cases of different span lengths, wind velocities, and angles of wind attack are studied, respectively. These results provide useful references for a theoretical basis for the study of galloping and the technique of anti-galloping in cold regions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicVibration and Dynamic AnalysisFrench-language works237,207