MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079761091 · doi:10.4043/22438-ms

The Role of Autonomous Underwater Vehicles in Deepwater Life of Field Integrity Management

2011· article· en· W2079761091 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueOTC Brasil · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsLockheed Martin (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubseaUnderwaterRemotely operated underwater vehicleMarine engineeringIntegrity managementIntervention AUVComputer scienceDynamic positioningStructural integrityFootprintVisual inspectionSystems engineeringEngineeringRobotMobile robotPipeline (software)Artificial intelligenceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Integrity Management of deepwater fields requires routine general visual inspections of critical infrastructure. To date the only means of conducting general visual inspection is through the use of ROVs. Deepwater ROV spreads are large and heavy requiring large support vessels with dynamic positioning capability and a significant number of personnel at sea. The capabilities of unmanned underwater vehicles have been enhanced through developments in Autonomous technology progressing to the point that autonomous underwater vehicles can now routinely conduct general visual inspection of subsea facilities. Benefits of Autonomous inspection include:–Reduced cost of operations–Faster inspection–Automatic Change Detection–Georegistered inspection data–Simultaneous operations from a single support vessel–Large standoff distances from the facility being inspected–Increased safety of operations–Reduced environmental impact–Reduced specification requirements on support vessel○Smaller footprint○Dynamic Positioning not required

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.175 · 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