MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4385873366 · doi:10.55274/r0012196

PR-652-203801-R04 Magnetometer Noise and Resolution

2021· report· en· W4385873366 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah Choudhury, Ross Underhill, Thomas W. Krause

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMagnetic Field Sensors Techniques
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMagnetometerAcousticsMeasure (data warehouse)Resistive touchscreenFluxgate compassNoise (video)MagnetostrictionMagnetic fieldPhysicsNuclear magnetic resonanceElectrical engineeringComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magnetometers are sensors that measure the magnitude and direction of a magnetic field. There are many types of magnetometers available, but they all rely on electromagnetic principles to measure fields. The most common types are Hall effect, anisotropic magneto-resistive (AMR) and fluxgate sensors. The goal of this study is to investigate several magnetometers to evaluate their capability to detect small changes in an ambient field. These small changes are on the order of 10 milligauss (1 �T) and are caused by the inverse-magnetostrictive effect, or Villari effect, from ferromagnetic pipes. The chosen magnetometer must have a low noise signal and a fine resolution to properly measure the field from the inverse-magnetostrictive effect. To evaluate the chosen magnetometers, multiple sets of measurements were made in a stationary magnetic field and the standard deviation of the data sets were calculated. The noise of some sensors was further investigated to verify that it was normally distributed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.301

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0900.075

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMagnetic Field Sensors Techniques→French-language works237,207→