An Intercomparison of Acoustic Current Meter Measurements in Low to Moderate Flow Regions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Instrumented, subsurface moorings deployed in the Scotian shelf and slope regions of the North Atlantic provide data in low to moderate flows for a current meter intercomparison. The primary instruments being evaluated are two acoustic Doppler single-point current meters, the Aanderaa Seaguard (SG) and the Teledyne RD Instruments (RDI) Doppler volume sampler (DVS), which are compared against older-generation single-point current meters and acoustic Doppler current profilers. Analysis showed that the root-mean-square (RMS) of the speed difference between concurrent instrument combinations was in the range of 1.0–1.6 cm s−1, which is about 3%–6% of the upper limit of speeds observed at these sites. Best agreement was between the DVS and the nearby Seaguard (RMS speed difference of 1.2 cm s−1), during the shelf deployment, and between the Aanderaa recording current meter 11 (RCM11) and the nearby Seaguard (1.0 cm s−1), during the slope deployment. Speed differences larger than 4 cm s−1 were uncommon, occurring less than 1.5% of the time. Slight overspeeding of one of the Seaguards is traced to an intentional alteration in the instruments' sampling strategy. The DVS compass had a slight meandering tendency that caused it to routinely disagree with other instruments by as much as 15° for hours at a time. The disagreement was random in direction and had no impact on most of the comparisons, but it did produce a 15% smaller magnitude of mean current. Subsequent to this field test, Teledyne RDI redesigned the DVS and replaced the compass with a new sensor.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".