MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969639870 · doi:10.5194/os-4-275-2008

Mutually consistent thermodynamic potentials for fluid water, ice and seawater: a new standard for oceanography

2008· article· en· W1969639870 on OpenAlexaff
Rainer Feistel, Daniel G. Wright, K. Miyagawa, Allan H. Harvey, Ján Hrubý, D. R. Jackett, Trevor J. McDougall, Wolfgang Wagner

Bibliographic record

VenueOcean science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of Oceanography
FundersNational Institute of Standards and Technology
KeywordsSeawaterConsistency (knowledge bases)Computer scienceComputationCompatibility (geochemistry)Applied mathematicsGeologyMathematicsAlgorithmOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. A new seawater standard for oceanographic and engineering applications has been developed that consists of three independent thermodynamic potential functions, derived from extensive distinct sets of very accurate experimental data. The results have been formulated as Releases of the International Association for the Properties of Water and Steam, IAPWS (1996, 2006, 2008) and are expected to be adopted internationally by other organizations in subsequent years. In order to successfully perform computations such as phase equilibria from combinations of these potential functions, mutual compatibility and consistency of these independent mathematical functions must be ensured. In this article, a brief review of their separate development and ranges of validity is given. We analyse background details on the conditions specified at their reference states, the triple point and the standard ocean state, to ensure the mutual consistency of the different formulations, and the necessity and possibility of numerically evaluating metastable states of liquid water. Computed from this formulation in quadruple precision (128-bit floating point numbers), tables of numerical reference values are provided as anchor points for the consistent incorporation of additional potential functions in the future, and as unambiguous benchmarks to be used in the determination of numerical uncertainty estimates of double-precision implementations on different platforms that may be customized for special purposes.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.005
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations44
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOcean scienceSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207