Effects of Foundation Models on Jack-up Site Assessment
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it