MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2241122064

Comparison of ice load calculations using ISO 19906, CSA, API and SNIP

2011· article· en· W2241122064 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Masterson, J Susan Tibbo

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the International Conference on Port and Ocean Engineering Under Arctic Conditions · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOffshore Engineering and Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStandardizationSubmarine pipelineArcticEngineeringMarine engineeringCivil engineeringEnvironmental scienceForensic engineeringComputer scienceGeologyGeotechnical engineeringOceanography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The new International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 19906 standard for offshore installations in the Arctic and sub-Arctic has extensive provisions for the calculation of ice loads on fixed offshore structures. Included are measures for the determination of ice loads due to crushing on vertical structures and for bending loads on sloping structures. Ice load comparisons have been made in the past between the Canadian Standards Association (CSA), American Petroleum Institute (API) and Russian Construction Codes and Regulations (SNiP) codes and these are combined herein with calculations using the ISO standard. The CSA and ISO standards have many similarities and care was taken in the writing of the ISO standard to consider the methods used in the SNiP code. In particular, considerable effort was made to harmonize the CSA and SNiP methods in the design of Sakhalin II, a gas production project located off the northeast coast of Sakhalin island. The paper will demonstrate the methods used and the results obtained from CSA, API, SNiP and ISO codes for ice load calculations.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.524

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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the International Conference on Port and Ocean Engineering Under Arctic ConditionsSame topicOffshore Engineering and TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207