MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982454836 · doi:10.4043/23935-ms

Powering Subsea Processing Facilities of the Future

2013· article· en· W1982454836 on OpenAlexaff
Josselin Legeay, Terence Hazel, Greg Peregrym

Bibliographic record

VenueOffshore Technology Conference · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsOceanWorks International (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubseaProcess (computing)AdaptabilityEngineeringFault (geology)Computer scienceReliability engineeringSystems engineeringMarine engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Subsea processing is going to increase dramatically over the next several years. A key component is a reliable power supply for the process loads. Located in a hostile and remote environment, the electrical distribution system will need to be designed according to the highest standards in power engineering ensuring dependable information for control and safe operation, and adaptability to changing operation conditions during the life of the field. A very important means of enhancing availability of the power supply is the possibility to do maintenance. For subsea applications this means the ability to locate where the fault has occurred and to be able to disconnect and retrieve the faulty equipment. This paper will describe how subsea power distribution can be achieved today based on known and proven technology. Equipment that has an excellent track record for surface processing facilities, installed in enclosures designed for the subsea environment and interconnected using cutting edge technology, will bring subsea processing facilities from the realm of fiction to reality.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.003

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.171 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOffshore Technology ConferenceSame topicOffshore Engineering and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207