Final report on the CCPR Key Comparison CCPR-K3.2014 Luminous Intensity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Main text The metrological equivalence of national measurement standards in the field of photometry and radiometry is determined by a set of key comparisons chosen and organised by the Consultative Committee of Photometry and Radiometry (CCPR) of the Comité international des poids et mesures (CIPM), working closely with the Regional Metrology Organisations (RMOs). In September 2009 the CCPR decided that a second round of the key comparison K3 Luminous Intensity be commenced. The National Research Council of Canada (NRC) was chosen to pilot this comparison. A total of 12 participants were selected from the three RMO group members: EURAMET&COOMET (6: IO-CSIC, LNE-CNAM, METAS, NPL, PTB, VNIIOFI), APMP&AFRIMETS (4: NMISA, NIM, NMIA, NMIJ), and SIM (2: NIST, NRC). The comparison was organised as a star comparison (NMI-Pilot-NMI) using incandescent standard lamps supplied by each NMI (National Metrology Institute) as the travelling comparison artifact. This report describes the comparison organisation (Section 2), the measurement methods and uncertainties achieved at all the participants and at the pilot (Sections 3 and 4), and the method for analysis and the results of the comparison according to this method (Section 4). It includes a comparison of the results of this comparison with the 1999 first round key comparison (Section 5). Section 6 presents a summary of the comparison. 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 https://www.bipm.org/kcdb/ . The final report has been peer-reviewed and approved for publication by the CCPR, 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".