MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1987846024 · doi:10.1121/1.4778965

The Boundary Characterization 2001 Experiment

2002· article· en· W1987846024 on OpenAlexaff
Charles W. Holland, Kevin D. LePage, Chris H. Harrison, Paul C. Hines, Dale D. Ellis, John C. Osler, Dan Hutt, Roger C. Gauss, Redwood W. Nero, John R. Preston

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeabedReverberationOceanographyAmbient noise levelLittoral zoneGeologyMarine engineeringBathymetryBoundary (topology)Reflection (computer programming)Environmental scienceRemote sensingComputer scienceAcousticsEngineeringSound (geography)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The weakest link in performance prediction for naval systems operating in coastal regions is the environmental data that drive the models. In shallow water downward refracting environments, the seabed properties and morphology often are the controlling environmental factors. In the Boundary 2001 Experiment, seabed, surface, and biologic scattering, seabed reflection, propagation, reverberation, and ambient noise data were collected in order to develop and refine measurement techniques for key environmental model inputs. Both Rapid Environmental Assessment (REA) methods and high-resolution measurement techniques were employed from 0.1–10 kHz. Supporting oceanographic, geologic, and geophysical data were also collected. The experiment was conducted in May 2001 in two littoral regions: the New Jersey shelf and the Scotian Shelf. This paper provides an overview of the experiment objectives, hypotheses and conduct. [Research supported by NATO SACLANT Undersea Research Centre, ONR, and DRDC-A.]

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicUnderwater Acoustics Research→French-language works237,207→