MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6992920289

Nanodielectrics: A "Universal" Panacea for Solving All Electrical Insulation Problems?

2010· article· en· W6992920289 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPower Transformer Diagnostics and Insulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanacea (medicine)Event (particle physics)Product (mathematics)Accident (philosophy)Point (geometry)Circumstantial evidence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At times new paradigms are observed to emerge. One example of\nthis concerns the introduction of the concept of “Nanodielectrics”\nin 2001. It is often demeaned that with new concepts must come\nnew ways of thinking, opened-minded consideration and unbounded\nexploration. In this spirit, an activity of high-creative intensity\nwas organized at Hydro-Québec’s research institute (IREQ)\non October 31st, 2008. A very diversified crowd of international\nscientists gathered at IREQ to exchange and reflect on the topic. An\nopportunity to be seized to break the established precincts and, to\nquestion and imagine the potentialities.\nProvocative at times, the comments and views were only meant\nto elicit the progress of our thinking. The present paper does not\nsummarize the proceedings of the event that came to be known as\nthe “Brainstorm at the institute”. This paper offers a broad and\ndiverse view of the topic, with many remaining questions of importance\nand feeded by recent progress and further reflection. Although\nlong, the paper gives a vivid picture of the situation allowing\ncriticism and stressing the many unanswered questions. Multidisciplinary\nzest is obvious.\nMost of the participants joined in this new adventure. The list of\nauthors is given at the end with an indication of their respective\ncontribution. In view of the great number of authors, no effort was\nundertaken to reconcile the styles. The end product is a result of a\nparticipatory effort, and every bit does not need to be guarantied\nand accepted by all.\nThe paper benefited particularly from the contributions of some\nscientists stranger to the usual field, namely A. Vijh, L. Utracki and\nH. Alamdari. Ashok Vijh joined us with his background in electrochemistry\nand has enlightened us with analogies of other fields\nconcepts and applications (Chapter II). Leszek Utracki, a polymer\nscientist of many talents, has taught us by linking the polymeric\ncontext of nanocomposites to the dielectric properties. He has produced\nChapter III. This would have been a logical determining\ncobblestone just after the introduction of the concept in 2001. This\nsomewhat warranted a welcomed longer contribution.Finally, Houshang\nAlamdari is back in the mist of academic research. He was\nassociated with the nanodielectrics from the beginning. For this\npaper, he introduced a non-electrotechnical application based on a\nnanodielectric material (Chapter VIII, section B).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicPower Transformer Diagnostics and InsulationFrench-language works237,207