Effects of Foundation Models on Jack-up Site Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to investigate effects of different foundation models on jack-up site assessment, numerical simulation of a jack-up is presented based on fix joint, pin joint, linear springs and elastic-plastic model. The hull, leg, hull-leg connection is modelled using equivalent beam, beam element, spring element, respectively. Environmental loads, such as steady current, wind, wave, inertial load and buoyancy, are also included in the numerical model. Static and natural frequency extraction analysis of the jack-up is then performed in elevated condition. Finally, static and natural response rules are proposed for the four foundation models. The results show that, the horizontal hull displacement, maximum leg stress, loads on spudcan B and horizontal moment on spudcan A decrease as the rotational stiffness increases, while the natural frequency, vertical load and horizontal load on spudcan A increase with the increasing rotational stiffness. And the responses for elastic-plastic model are close to the pin joint. The proposed modelling and analyzing method is effective and reliable, which could provide guidance for jack-up development and assessment. Key words: Jack-up; Fix joint; Pin joint; Linear springs; Elastic-plastic model; Numerical simulation
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".