MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118515535 · doi:10.1109/oceans.1993.326084

Aluminum-hydrogen peroxide power system for an unmanned underwater vehicle

2002· article· en· W2118515535 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
G.D. Deuchars, Jeff Hill, J.H. Stannard, D.C. Stockburger

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFuel Cells and Related Materials
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower (physics)UnderwaterRemotely operated underwater vehicleComputer scienceUnmanned underwater vehicleAutomotive engineeringMarine engineeringEnvironmental scienceAerospace engineeringAeronauticsEngineeringMobile robotPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alupower Canada Limited and the Department of National Defence with CRAD funding and DGMEM engineering support are designing and constructing a fuel cell power system (FCPS) to power small unmanned vehicles (UUVs). The ARCS 1, a DND/DREP owned experimental unmanned submersible, has been chosen as the trial vessel. The FCPS will provide sufficient energy to allow the UUV to operate submerged, continuously for 30 hours which is approximately 4 to 6 times the endurance of its existing nickel cadmium system. Unmanned underwater vehicles are attaining increasing importance as "force extenders" for more conventional manned maritime vehicles in times of budgetary constraint. Despite rapid advances in many UUV systems such as navigation and sensor technology, UUVs are now limited by the availability of an advanced power source capable of attaining the desired mission. A steady state power output of 1.7 kW is achieved within a volume of 375 litres and system mass of 315 kg.>

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.005

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations14
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFuel Cells and Related MaterialsFrench-language works237,207