MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160184505 · doi:10.1109/oceans.1993.326195

A command, control and communications interface for an environmental sampling ROV

2002· article· en· W2160184505 on OpenAlexaff
D.J. MacQuarrie, L.R. Cosby, C. Edley, W.A. Gallant

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAdvanced Software Engineering Methodologies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterface (matter)Remotely operated underwater vehicleSoftwareCommand and controlSampling (signal processing)Computer scienceUser interfaceControl (management)Mission control centerEmbedded systemOperating systemHuman–computer interactionSystems engineeringEngineeringTelecommunicationsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design and implementation of a command, control, communications (C/sup 3/) interface for a low-cost environmental sampling ROV (Erebus) is presented as a case study. The interface is designed to use existing technologies to provide a low-cost, easily operated console that could be easily modified. The console was designed and tested entirely in software, with all necessary piloting information presented on a single large monitor. The software was designed using a combination of rapid prototyping and informal specification. Various benefits of such a design are noted, as well as several problems encountered. Although this type of interface may not appear practical for single-mission ROVs, it has many advantages which makes it an attractive alternative for student research vehicles such as this.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Software Engineering MethodologiesFrench-language works237,207