MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A review of CORK designs and operations during the Ocean Drilling Program

2005· review· en· W2146318591 on OpenAlexaff
Keir Becker, Earl E. Davis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
FundersJapan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and TechnologyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCorkDrillingPetroleum engineeringEngineeringMarine engineeringComputer scienceMechanical engineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper provides a review of 1989-2003 designs and operations of the 20 Circulation Obviation Retrofit Kit (CORK) long-term subseafloor hydrogeological observatories installed in 18 holes during the Ocean Drilling Program (ODP).The basic configurations of the four models of CORKs developed during the ODP period are summarized: the original single-seal CORK (14 installations in 12 holes, 1991-2001) and three multilevel models, including the Advanced CORK or ACORK (2 installations, 2001), a wireline instrumented multipacker system or wireline CORK (2 installations, 2001), and the CORK-II (2 installations, 2002).The evolution of the scientific instrumentation installed in ODP CORKs and the history of postinstallation submersible operations are described.This instrumentation was provided by scientists with support of national ODP research funding, which also supported the extensive submersible time devoted to postinstallation data downloads and instrument servicing.Although the purpose of this paper does not include a review of CORK scientific results, we offer some comments on scientific lessons learned during the ODP CORK effort.We describe the funding and engineering support structure that held for the ODP CORK installations and close with some comments on the importance of engineering support for the Integrated Ocean Drilling Program goals involving longterm borehole observatories.We also provide a complete bibliography of CORK-related literature through 2004 and all of the data sets in digital form collected through 2003 from the six ODP CORK installations installed in either 1991 or 1996 near the Juan de Fuca Ridge, of which all but one are still in service. A review of CORK designs and operations during the Ocean Drilling

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.029
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations91
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMethane Hydrates and Related PhenomenaFrench-language works237,207