MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238913318 · doi:10.1088/0026-1394/56/1a/01002

On-site comparison of Quantum Hall Effect resistance standards of the NRC-CNRC and the BIPM: ongoing key comparison BIPM.EM-K12

2018· article· en· W4238913318 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMetrologia · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Electrical Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutual recognitionOhmMetrologyStandard uncertaintyPhysicsQuantum Hall effectMathematicsStatisticsMeasurement uncertaintyNuclear physicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.263 · 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