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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Quarter's Book Review is another in the series of reviews by seasoned EMC engineers about books that have stood the “test of time” and found to be essential to their careers. I continue to hope that that this series is helpful to younger EMC engineers who want to get advice about what references are the most valuable to their work. I continue to look for engineers who can contribute to the series and to the careers. So, please volunteer. In this edition of the EMC Magazine, the review is of the third edition of Clayton Paul's, “Introduction to Electromagnetic Compatibility.” As most of you know, Clayton's career has been “completed” for some time, but his colleagues, Bob Scully and Mark Steffka, have worked to preserve Clayton's legacy in this new edition. I appreciate their effort! Personally, I have reviewed the third edition myself as below because I have found it to be extraordinarily useful. This book can be an important addition to your reference library if you do not already have a copy.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
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 it