MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386902724 · doi:10.1109/tmag.2023.3317769

Experimental Validation of a New Power-Equivalent Magnetic Permeability Model for Induction Heating Applications

2023· article· en· W4386902724 on OpenAlexafffund
Gregory Giard, Kevin McMeekin, Maxime Tousignant, Frédéric Sirois

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Magnetics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInduction Heating and Inverter Technology
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de recherche du Québec
KeywordsInduction heatingMaterials scienceAlgorithmPhysicsComputer scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Mechanical engineeringQuantum mechanicsChemistryEngineeringElectromagnetic coilOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses a recently published methodology to determine the time-harmonic (TH) effective magnetic permeability used to simulate induction heating problems comprising non-linear and hysteretic materials. The model and its implementation in a whole multiphysics numerical scheme are first shown and calibrated with temperature-dependent magnetic measurements for simulating the specific behavior of an AISI 4340 working steel piece during the induction heating process. Then, the experimental setup designed to send${\sim }4$kW of heating power in steel disks is explained. The setup allows the disks to reach the austenitization and Curie temperature of steel in 30 s. The temperature distributions were measured with an infrared (IR) thermal camera and compared with the simulation both in space and time during the heating. In addition to being numerically inexpensive, the computational model successfully predicts the temperature within 10% of accuracy between$200 ^{\circ} \text{C}$and$800 ^{\circ} \text{C}$.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on MagneticsSame topicInduction Heating and Inverter TechnologyFrench-language works237,207