MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067509495 · doi:10.1121/1.4767961

Modeling obstacle avoidance sonar performance in the presence of near-surface bubbles

2012· article· en· W2067509495 on OpenAlexaff
Mark V. Trevorrow, Vincent Myers

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of meetings on acoustics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSonarBubbleAcousticsClutterObstacleInterference (communication)Computer sciencePhysicsGeologyRadarMechanicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Near-surface bubbles created by breaking waves can cause significant interference with the performance of High-Frequency (>10 kHz) Obstacle Avoidance Sonars (OAS). In particular, field measurements have shown the frequent occurrence of bubbles organized into vertical, plume-like structures. Previous work has shown that bubble plume structures induce both significant spatial variations in the reverberation level and anomalies in path-integrated extinction loss relative to predictions from uniform bubble layer models. This present study assesses the performance impacts due to bubble structures for OAS modelled. Multi-ping probabilities of detection and false alarm are predicted using the standard Swerling models as well as the cumulative detection probability over multiple pings using a lambda-sigma process. The specific performance of generic OAS at 90 and 200 kHz are modelled under a variety of sea-states.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of meetings on acousticsSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207