MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970942034 · doi:10.1139/l03-020

Hydrodynamic analysis of wave interactions with a moored floating breakwater using the element-free Galerkin method

2003· article· en· W1970942034 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jeongwoo Lee, Woncheol Cho

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Civil Engineering · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWave and Wind Energy Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreakwaterMooringGalerkin methodBoundary element methodFinite element methodBoundary value problemHelmholtz equationNumerical analysisStiffnessComputer simulationEngineeringMarine engineeringStructural engineeringMathematicsGeotechnical engineeringMathematical analysisSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper deals with a numerical investigation of incident wave interactions with a moored pontoon-type floating breakwater. The element-free Galerkin method, in which only nodal data are required to analyze the problem, is employed to solve the diffraction and radiation boundary value problems addressed by the modified Helmholtz equation. The numerical model includes the hydrodynamic and mooring analyses, and it is validated by previous numerical and experimental results. Using the numerical model, we are able to assess the hydrodynamic performance of a moored pontoon-type floating breakwater in regular waves. Numerical results are presented to show the effects of wave conditions and mooring system configuration. This paper also presents the simple forms of stiffness coefficients of a slack mooring line. The influence of mooring line condition on the performance of a floating breakwater is highlighted. Key words: moored floating breakwater, element-free Galerkin method, mooring line condition.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations34
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Civil EngineeringSame topicWave and Wind Energy SystemsFrench-language works237,207