MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2211142126 · doi:10.3390/jmse4010003

Improvement of Mooring Configurations in Geraldton Harbour

2015· article· en· W2211142126 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marine Science and Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsW.F. Baird & Associates Coastal Engineers (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreakwaterWinchFenderMooringMarine engineeringEngineeringHarbourEnvironmental scienceStructural engineeringComputer scienceGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ports exposed to high energy long wave conditions can experience significantly reduced berth operability. Geraldton is perhaps one of the best known examples. Recent studies to mitigate the problems have concentrated on the reduction of the long waves by extending the breakwater. However, this is quite costly. Various countermeasures related to the mooring configuration are defined and analysed in this paper. The analysed alternatives are use of shore-based mooring lines, installation of softer fenders, a combination of these two, and deployment of Cavotec MoorMaster™ units. These alternatives were compared with the existing mooring configuration and with the option to extend the breakwater. The best improvement (50% increase of threshold long wave height inside the harbour) is reached by installing a combination of pneumatic fenders and constant tension winches set to 30 t, or nylon breast lines on a brake winch with a pretension of 25 t. In this way, the vessel is pulled into the fenders and fender friction prevents excessive surging of the ship along the berth.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.158

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.183 · 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