MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W215032926 · doi:10.4224/12328375

Whole-ship motions and accelerations at the stern of the CCGS Louis S. St. Laurent : October 2000 ice trials

2001· article· en· W215032926 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Michelle Johnston, R. Frederking, G.W. Timco

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaCanadian Wood Council
FundersTransport Canada
KeywordsSternPropellerSea trialGeodesyMarine engineeringSurgeGeologyMeteorologyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The MOTAN inertial measurement system was used to determine whole-ship motions and accelerations at the stern of the LOUIS S. ST-LAURENT during the October 2000 ice trials. A total of 43 ice impact events were recorded during the trials, most of which involved secondyear and multi-year floes. Impact speeds ranged from 2 to 16 kt. Since the objective of the October 2000 Trials was to examine propeller-ice interaction, data from the MOTAN sensor, which was installed near the ship舗s centre of gravity, were used to compute the whole-ship motions at the ship舗s centre propeller, in the stern. During the 43 events, maximum accelerations in heave, sway and surge were 1.1 m/s², 1.9 m/s² and 1.0 m/s² respectively, at the centre propeller. The events produced a maximum roll of 7.6°, compared to maximum a pitch and yaw of 1.8° and 1.5°, respectively. Maximum accelerations in roll, pitch and yaw were 2.8 deg/s², 1.8 deg/s² and 1.5 deg/s² respectively. Results showed no apparent relation between impact speed and the measured whole-ship motions. Very few of the impact events qualified as symmetrical, head-on impacts where ship motions are primarily in heave and pitch; roll and yaw motions were a significant component of most of the impact events.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→