Maintaining legacy data: Saving Belfast Harbour (UK) tide-gauge data (1901–2010)
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tide gauge data are identified as legacy data given the radical transition between observation method and required output format associated with tide gauges over the 20th-century. Observed water level variation through tide-gauge records is regarded as the only significant basis for determining recent historical variation (decade to century) in mean sea-level and storm surge. There are limited tide gauge records that cover the 20th century, such that the Belfast (UK) Harbour tide gauge would be a strategic long-term (110 years) record, if the full paper-based records (marigrams) were digitally restructured to allow for consistent data analysis. This paper presents the methodology of extracting a consistent time series of observed water levels from the 5 different Belfast Harbour tide gauges’ positions/machine types, starting late 1901. Tide-gauge data was digitally retrieved from the original analogue (daily) records by scanning the marigrams and then extracting the sequential tidal elevations with graph-line seeking software (Ungraph™). This automation of signal extraction allowed the full Belfast series to be retrieved quickly, relative to any manual x–y digitisation of the signal. Restructuring variably lengthed tidal data sets to a consistent daily, monthly and annual file format was undertaken by project-developed software: Merge&Convert and MergeHYD allow consistent water level sampling both at 60 min (past standard) and 10 min intervals, the latter enhancing surge measurement. Belfast tide-gauge data have been rectified, validated and quality controlled (IOC 2006 standards). The result is a consistent annual-based legacy data series for Belfast Harbour that includes over 2 million tidal-level data observations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it