Construction and comparison of high temperature fixed points at NRC and CEM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper describes the collaborative project between National Research Council of Canada (NRC) and Centro Español de Metrología (CEM) for the construction and comparison of high temperature fixed points (HTFPs). A hybrid-type crucible that uses the piston method for filling has been jointly developed. A series of 12 high temperature fixed point blackbodies (HTFPBBs) have been constructed, including Cu, Ru-C, Ir-C, Re-C and WC-C covering the temperature range from 1084°C to 2750°C. All these cells were filled in NRC facilities by CEM and NRC staff. Two cells of each type of fixed point were constructed (except for the WC-C cells), using crucibles from two different suppliers in order to study the influence of the density and emissivity of the crucible in the HTFPs’ performance. Moreover, four WC-C cells were made using tungsten powder from two different suppliers, covering all the possible combinations of tungsten powder and crucibles acquired for this project. All cells, and additionally a Pt-C HTFPBB belonging to NRC, have been measured firstly at NRC and, afterwards, at CEM. Both laboratories have calculated the ITS-90 temperatures from their respective measurements and the results have been compared. Differences on the ITS-90 temperatures of the HTFPBBs measured at each lab are within uncertainties of the comparison. After the comparison, CEM kept one Cu cell, one Ru-C cell, one Re-C cell and two WC-C cells. The rest of the fixed points involved in the comparison were sent back to NRC.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".