MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Design-oriented EMC analysis of wiring systems

2020· preprint· en· W3095573571 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

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsSafran Electronics (Canada)
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsPoint (geometry)Electromagnetic compatibilityComputer scienceStatistical analysisReliability engineeringEngineeringElectronic engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern aircraft hosts a large number of electric systems. Due to the transition to a More Electrical Aircraft, future platforms will use even more electric systems. This increases the complexity of the EWIS design from an EMC point of view. When possible, segregation between potentially interfering cables or bundles is a convenient solution to avoid EMC problems. Due to the huge number of installation configurations, the evaluation of the minimal segregation distance between two interacting bundles can be unfeasible. To overcome this situation, a specialized tool has been developed, based on a statistical approach for the analysis of the interaction between couples of bundles. In the paper, the different modules needed for this analysis are detailed and described. Some canonical analysis are then reported to show the capabilities of the tool.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.947
Threshold uncertainty score0.865

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.129 · 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