MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158044347 · doi:10.1061/9780784413067.024

<i>Rich Passage 1</i> Wake Validation and Shore Response Study

2013· article· en· W2158044347 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica Côté, Greg Curtiss, Philip D. Osborne

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicShip Hydrodynamics and Maneuverability
Canadian institutionsGolder Associates (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShoreWakeMarine engineeringEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMeteorologyGeologyOceanographyEngineeringAerospace engineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surface waves generated by high-speed ferries operating at trans-critical and super-critical speeds can potentially cause adverse impacts to shorelines in confined waterways and environmentally sensitive areas. Repeated attempts to establish fast passenger ferry service on the Seattle-Bremerton route in Puget Sound have met with limited success due to such impacts along the narrowest portion of the route. This paper presents results from a multi-disciplinary study designed to evaluate the feasibility of re-introducing high-speed, passenger-only ferry service on the Seattle- Bremerton route. Performance of a new low-wake design, foil-assisted catamaran is being tested against wake and impact criteria that were developed from a synthesis of an extensive data set including in-situ physical and biological impact studies, full-scale field trials, and computational modelling studies of candidate vessels. The work is being conducted in two phases: (1) evaluation of the high-speed foil-assisted catamaran (Rich Passage 1) for commercial application in a wake-sensitive area and (2) shore response studies to provide data to understand wake behavior from Rich Passage I near the shoreline and to quantify beach response to wakes. Results indicate Rich Passage 1 can operate at 36 to 37 knots and meet the wake criterion established for the Rich Passage portion of the Seattle-to-Bremerton route during earlier phases of research. Preliminary analysis of data from shore response studies shows substantial variability in response from one shoreline to the next. This variability is primarily attributed to differences in wake power measured at the shoreline resulting from differences in bathymetry, tidal currents, and distance from the vessel sailing line.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicShip Hydrodynamics and ManeuverabilityFrench-language works237,207