MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2040560718 · doi:10.1109/oceans.2007.4449236

QTC DEEP - A ROV-Mounted Single Beam Acoustic Seabed Classification System for High-Resolution Mapping

2007· article· en· W2040560718 on OpenAlexafffund
Stephen F. Bloomer, B. Biffard, N. Ross Chapman, J.M. Preston

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsQuest University CanadaUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of Victoria
KeywordsSeabedGeologyFootprintRemotely operated underwater vehicleSeafloor spreadingRemotely operated vehicleDeep seaRemote sensingAcousticsOceanographySeismologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For single-beam acoustic seabed classification from ship-mounted echosounders, the beam footprint on the seafloor is often smaller than the spatial scale of seabed variability. In deep water, the beam footprint on the seafloor from a ship-mounted sounder is quite large, inhibiting mapping of seabed variability. To mitigate this problem, a high-resolution deep-sea acoustic seabed classification system, QTC DEEP, was developed by adapting and applying Quester Tangent Corporation (QTC) acoustic seabed classification technology, known as QTC VIEW Series 4, together with a pinger electronics package mounted together inside a pressure-housing on board a remotely operated vehicle. This paper presents the classification of seafloor echo return data from three sites on the British Columbia coast to demonstrate the utility of QTC DEEP .

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207