MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2024675273 · doi:10.1115/1.2151199

Computation of Wave-Body Interactions Using the Panel-Free Method and Exact Geometry

2006· article· en· W2024675273 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWave and Wind Energy Systems
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDiscretizationDiffractionCylinderFree surfaceComputationMathematical analysisGeometryGravitational singularityDomain (mathematical analysis)Boundary (topology)Integral equationHullBoundary value problemWave equationMathematicsRotational symmetrySurface (topology)PhysicsOpticsMechanicsAlgorithmEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A panel-free method was developed earlier to solve the radiation and the diffraction problems of floating bodies in waves in the time domain. This method has been extended to compute wave interactions with bodies in water of infinite depth and finite depth in the frequency domain. After removing the singularities in the boundary integral equation and representing the body surface exactly by either analytical description or NURBS surfaces, the boundary integral equation can be discretized over the exact body surface by Gaussian quadratures. Accuracy of the method is demonstrated by its application to the radiation and the diffraction problems of a floating hemisphere, a vertically floating axisymmetric cylinder, and a Wigley hull. Computed added-mass, damping coefficients, and wave exciting forces agree well with published results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.214 · 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