Application of decision tree techniques for the Prediction of Significant Wave Height
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
Significant wave height estimates are necessary for many applications in coastal and offshore engineering and therefore various prediction models have been proposed in the literature for this purpose. In this study, the performances of Decision trees classification for prediction wave parameters were investigated. The data set used in this study comprises of wave data and over water wind data gathered from deep water location in Lake Ontario. The data set was divided into two groups. The first one that comprises of 26 days wind and wave measurement was used as training and checking data to develop tree models. The second one that comprises of 14 days wind and wave measurement was used to verify the models. Training and testing data include wind speed, wind direction, fetch length and wind duration as input variables and significant wave heights as output variable. The wave heights for whole data set are grouped into wave height bins of 0.25 m. Then a class is assigned to each bin. For evaluation of the developed model the mean of each class is compared with the observed data.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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