MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2243256531

Can We Engineer Ice Rubble for Protection of Offshore Platforms in the Beaufort Sea

2011· article· en· W2243256531 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Anne Barker, G.W. Timco, Paul Spencer

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRubbleSubmarine pipelineWork (physics)Beaufort seaEngineeringSea iceEnvironmental scienceMarine engineeringGeologyGeotechnical engineeringOceanographyMechanical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this four-year study was to evaluate and develop methods of engineering ice rubble to reduce loads on offshore structures. Numerous questions needed to be addressed, not the least of which were: "Is it worthwhile?", "Is it practical?", and "What will it cost?" This paper provides an overview description of the work done for the project. The conclusions were that for situations where a caisson-type structure is located in a region of weak, cohesive soil, generating ice rubble through the use of Ice Rubble Generators (IRGs) was both practical (reducing ice loads on the structure and extending the range of loading that the structure could encounter) and economical (a significant reduction in structure cost, despite the additional costs of the IRGs, depending on the location). The IRGs also had added benefits with respect to reducing ice loading due to potential Multi-Year Ice incursions in the summer. The results indicate that IRGs are an additional design option as part of the development of offshore production structures in the American and Canadian Beaufort Seas.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARCSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207