MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Nanogenerators in Korea

2019· book· en· W3122866168 on OpenAlexaff
Dukhyun Choi, Yong H. Park

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsSAIT Polytechnic
FundersKorea Railroad Research InstituteMinistry of Science and ICT, South KoreaAgency for Defense DevelopmentNational Research Foundation of KoreaKorea Institute of Industrial TechnologyKorea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and PlanningMinistry of Trade, Industry and EnergySamsungWonkwang UniversityMinistry of Science, ICT and Future PlanningChung-Ang UniversityKyung Hee UniversityNational Research Foundation
KeywordsTriboelectric effectElectricity generationElectricityEmerging technologiesEnergy harvestingManufacturing engineeringEngineeringSystems engineeringPower (physics)Electrical engineeringNanotechnologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fossil fuels leaded the 21st century industrial revolution but caused some critical problems such as exhaustion of resources and global warming. Also, current power plants require too much high cost and long time for establishment and facilities to provide electricity. Thus, developing new power production systems with environmental friendliness and low-cost is critical global needs. There are some emerging energy harvesting technologies such as thermoelectric, piezoelectric, and triboelectric nanogenerators, which have great advantages on eco-friendly low-cost materials, simple fabrication, and various operating sources. Since the introduction of various energy harvesting technologies, many novel designs and applications as power suppliers and physical sensors in the world have been demonstrated based on their unique advantages. In this Special Issue, we would like to address and share basic approaches, new designs, and industrial applications related to thermoelectric, piezoelectric, and triboelectric devices which are on-going in Korea. With this Special Issue, we aim to promote fundamental understanding and to find novel ways to achieve industrial product manufacturing for energy harvesters.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.011

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials→French-language works237,207→