MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058539903 · doi:10.1109/oceans.2006.306830

The SURA Coastal Ocean Observing and Prediction Program (SCOOP) Service-Oriented Architecture

2006· article· en· W2058539903 on OpenAlexaff
Philip Bogden, Gabrielle Allen, Greg Stone, Jon MacLaren, Gerald J. Creager, Larry Flournoy, Wei Zhao, Hans C. Graber, Sara Graves, Rick Luettich, William Perrie, Lavanya Ramakrishnan, Dan Reed, Y. Peter Sheng, Haoxiang Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Computational Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of Oceanography
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInteroperabilityComputer scienceService-oriented architectureSCOOPWorkflowService layerModular designService (business)Variety (cybernetics)Data access layerLayer (electronics)Interface (matter)Middleware (distributed applications)ArchitectureWeb serviceDistributed computingWorld Wide WebSoftware engineeringData modelingOperating systemDatabase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Southeastern Universities Research Association (SURA) Coastal Ocean Observing and Prediction Program (SCOOP) is a multi-institution collaboration whose partners are working to implement a modular, distributed system for real-time prediction and visualization of the impacts of extreme atmospheric events, including storm surge and wind-driven waves. SCOOP Program partners are developing an interoperable network of modularized components (numerical models, information catalogs, distributed archives, computing resources and network infrastructure) linked by standardized interfaces. This service-oriented architecture (SOA) is emerging as a prototype open access, distributed virtual laboratory for oceanographic research and coastal applications. The SOA approach allows data integration from multiple platforms and enables the exchange of resources, tools, and ideas among a virtual community. The SOA framework consists of five layers: (1) a user interface; (2) an application and tools layer; (3) a management layer; (4) a resource access layer; and (5) physical resources all linked by cross-cutting services. The SOA layer components support several different use cases because they can be configured into a variety of workflows

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Software · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
GenreSoftware

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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Computational Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207