MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203400824 · doi:10.2118/204487-ms

Permanent Magnet Motor Safety

2021· article· en· W3203400824 on OpenAlex
Barry Nicholson, Carlos Yicon, Dennis Harris, Richard Delaloye

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
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOil and Gas Production Techniques
Canadian institutionsConocoPhillips (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTroubleshootingInstallationOperations managementBusinessRisk analysis (engineering)Computer scienceComputer securityEngineeringReliability engineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As Permanent Magnet Motors (PMMs) become more widely used because of their many benefits, awareness of the potential safety hazards arising from their differences from Induction Motors (IMs) is important. Due to their construction, the magnetic field presence is always "on" with PMM – even when not under energized electrical energy. PMMs are AC generators when freely rotating forward or backward. Elevated safety consciousness is needed to avoid serious injury or fatality when working with PMMs. This paper presents operational procedures for installing, pulling, troubleshooting, and handling PMMs with a focus upon safety. Hazards have been identified, and some mitigations are recommended to eliminate the potential danger and bring awareness to the petroleum industry (and others) to ensure that all workers go home safely. The observations presented in this paper came directly from field experience with operators, equipment manufacturers, and service providers.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOil and Gas Production TechniquesFrench-language works237,207