MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6999435918

Compaction of SMC powders for high saturation flux density

2005· article· en· W6999435918 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPowder Metallurgy Techniques and Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPressingSaturation (graph theory)MagnetCompactionFlux (metallurgy)Finite element method
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The application of Soft Magnetic Composites (SMC) to a Transverse-Flux Permanent Magnet (TFPM) machine is studied. Four SMC material and pressing methods are investigated for high saturation flux density. Low dielectric content, Die Wall Lubrication and cold pressing allow the best combination of high material density (7.45 g/cm 3), high saturation flux density (1.53 T) and good mechanical resistance (65 MPa). 624 Flux concentrators were produced with SMC material and inserted in the rotor of a TFPM machine with toothed rotor. Torque and flux measurements are presented and are validated with finite element analysis.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicPowder Metallurgy Techniques and MaterialsFrench-language works237,207