MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2318013589 · doi:10.1177/154193120504901205

Modeling the Effectiveness of Tools to Assist Sonar Operators

2005· article· en· W2318013589 on OpenAlexaff
Michael L. Matthews, Jeff Bos, Jacquelyn M. Crébolder, Sharon McFadden

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSonarOperator (biology)Computer scienceTask (project management)Variety (cybernetics)UnderwaterProcess (computing)Noise (video)Identification (biology)HarmonicsSystems engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligenceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The task of building the underwater picture from sonar data is made complex by high volumes of noise and multiple data that arrive from a variety of acoustic sources detected at great distances by modern, sonar equipment. Typically, acoustic sources from ships have a complex spectrum consisting of several base frequency components and related harmonics. The task for operators is to analyse the data to determine if there is a pattern that represents the signature of a known source, thereby leading to identification of a vessel. Since the task can be highly labour intensive automated decision aids may be of value to the operator. This project addresses how to predict and optimise the impact of new technologies in system re-design by using a modeling/simulation approach to operator-system functionality. A generic sonar analysis process was simulated and the effectiveness of a decision aid evaluated. The improvement in performance predicted by the aid was then validated experimentally.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual MeetingSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207