Analytical model of 2D electric potential and current transfer in superconducting tapes with a current flow diverter architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This work presents a generalization of the concept of current transfer length (CTL) between the stabilizer and the superconducting layer of high temperature superconductor (HTS) coated conductor tapes with a current flow diverter (CFD) architecture. The CFD architecture consists in a non-uniform interfacial resistance between the two layers, namely a high interfacial resistance in the middle of the tape and a low interfacial resistance on its sides. With this architecture, when the current transfers from the stabilizer to the superconductor to circumvent a normal zone or a crack, a current density component along the width of the tape appears, required for the current to circumvent the high interfacial resistance. This current component does not exist in a classical tape architecture. To describe quantitatively this current transfer, we developed a quasi-analytical formula that computes the electric potential in the stabilization layer, from which we can derive the current density components. The model is then used to determine the current transfer length (CTL) in tapes with a CFD architecture, using a generalized definition of the CTL. The model is simple and quick to run and allows deepening our understanding of the dependence of the CTL with different geometric and materials parameters, and clearly shows that the CFD architecture is very effective in increasing the CTL of HTS tapes while keeping the effective interfacial resistance to very low values. The model is quasi-analytical because it requires the numerical evaluation of a transcendental equation for determining one set of coefficients, but otherwise, it takes the form of a double summation of analytical functions (series solution). The exactness of the model has been verified by comparisons with finite element simulations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".