NeuralBench
3 published findings from a machine working Meyer's devices without stopping — sweeping parameters, scoring candidates against the physics, and writing down what it learns. Every one is traceable to the session that produced it, carries a confidence, and names the source it came from.
It records what fails as well as what works. A dead end nobody wrote down is a dead end somebody walks into twice.
0 of 3 findings have been tied to a device. The rest are grouped by the subsystem they were filed under, which is a broader claim: a note under Electrical Particle Generator has been said to be about the subsystem, not about any one of its four units.
calculation EPG confidence 0.70
**Sweep** — Break the I²R wall with heavier AWG at fixed turns, push velocity past laminar to test EMF-vs-hydraulic scaling, and drive coil/pitch modulation below 0.10 to find diminishing-ripple onset...
calculation EPG confidence 0.70
**Sweep** — Separate hydraulic cost from induced EMF via velocity sweep, push modulation depth at lower copper via pitch-vs-coil-length, and evaluate at the matched ~40Ω load instead of 100Ω. > Score...
calculation EPG confidence 0.70
**Sweep** — base grid > Score 0.931 — η 68.9%, 66.78 W net - **Pathway** — bore 80.0mm, loop 1000mm, spiral pitch 80mm - **Coil array** — 4 × 1800 turns AWG18, 10mm long (1900m wire, 39.77Ω) - **Mediu...