On-site comparison of Quantum Hall Effect resistance standards of the NRC-CNRC and the BIPM: ongoing key comparison BIPM.EM-K12
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ongoing on-site comparison BIPM.EM-K12 is part of the BIPM programme implemented to verify the international coherence of the primary resistance standards. It allows National Metrology Institutes (NMIs) to validate their implementations of the Quantum Hall Effect (QHE) for dc resistance traceability by comparison to the reference maintained at the BIPM. In this comparison, the realization of the ohm from the QHE-based standard of the NMIs at 100 Ω is compared with that realized by the BIPM from its own transportable quantum Hall resistance standard. This comparison is completed by scaling measurements from 100 Ω to 1 Ω and 10 kΩ through the measurement of the resistance ratios 100 Ω/1 Ω and 10 kΩ/100 Ω, respectively. In June 2018 a new BIPM.EM-K12 on-site comparison was carried out at the National Research Council Canada (NRC-CNRC). It was the first time the NRC-CNRC participated in this comparison program. Measurements of the 100 Ω transfer standard in terms of the conventional value of the von Klitzing constant, RK-90, agreed to 5 parts in 10 10 with a relative combined standard uncertainty u c = 23 × 10 -10 . Measurements of 10 kΩ/100 Ω and 100 Ω/1 Ω ratios agreed to 13 parts in 10 10 with u c = 21 × 10 -10 and to 1 part in 10 10 with u c = 40 × 10 -10 , respectively. KEY WORDS FOR SEARCH Quantum Hall Effect, key comparison, resistance standard, resistance ratio Main text To reach the main text of this paper, click on Final Report . Note that this text is that which appears in Appendix B of the BIPM key comparison database kcdb.bipm.org/ . The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCEM, according to the provisions of the CIPM Mutual Recognition Arrangement (CIPM MRA).
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 | 0.023 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.007 |
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".