An international key comparison of free-field hydrophone calibrations in the frequency range 1 to 500kHz
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
A description is given of the results of a Key Comparison of primary free-field standards for underwater acoustics at frequencies from 1 to 500kHz. This is the first such Key Comparison exercise in the field of underwater acoustic calibration and measurement. Laboratories from UK, Germany, USA, Russia, China, Canada, and South Africa participated by calibrating three reference hydrophones, with project coordination provided by the National Physical Laboratory, UK. The agreement between the results obtained from the comparison was generally encouraging, with the calibration values reported by the laboratories agreeing within quoted uncertainties over the majority of the frequency range, and the results generally lying within a ±0.5-dB band for frequencies up to 300kHz. A discussion is given of the general sources of uncertainties in the calibrations, in particular those which are thought to have contributed to the differences in the results between laboratories. The results of the participants have been used to estimate the equivalence of national measurement standards within this field.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 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