MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W858951641 · doi:10.1520/stp43656s

Analysis of Errors Due to Edge Heat Loss in Guarded Hot Plates

2009· book-chapter· en· W858951641 on OpenAlexaff
William F. Woodside

Bibliographic record

VenueASTM International eBooks · 2009
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Applied Research
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnhanced Data Rates for GSM EvolutionMaterials scienceComputer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A concise, easily evaluated analytical expression for the error in thermal conductivity measurement by the guarded hot plate, due to heat exchange with the ambient air, is derived assuming that the temperature distribution along the specimen edges may be represented by a mean temperature. This solution agrees closely with one presented by Somers and Cyphers for the special case of the specimen edges held at the cold plate temperature. The error is shown to depend upon three dimensionless parameters: (a) the ratio of guard ring width to specimen thickness; (b) the ratio of the length of side of the test area to specimen thickness; and ( c) a number between zero and unity whose value is determined by the specimen-edge-temperature distribution. The ASTM specimen thickness requirements are based only upon the first parameter. The approximate effect of the size of the test area upon the error is described. A procedure is proposed for testing, when necessary, very thick specimens. This involves the measurement of the specimen-edge- temperature distribution during test (with or without edge insulation), calculation of the error, and correction of the measured conductivity.

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueASTM International eBooksSame topicEngineering Applied ResearchFrench-language works237,207