MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320155892 · doi:10.1002/9781118918937.ch4

Considering Mine Countermeasures Exploratory Operations Conducted by Autonomous Underwater Vehicles

2016· other· en· W2320155892 on OpenAlexaff
Bao Nguyen, David Hopkin, Handson Yip

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication Systems
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSonarUnderwaterMetric (unit)Key (lock)Computer scienceEngineeringPerformance metricReal-time computingData miningArtificial intelligenceGeographyComputer securityOperations management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter focuses on two key metrics that characterize the efficiency and effectiveness of autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs) in such operations. The first metric is the confidence that mines are or are not present in the search area. The second is the time required to achieve that confidence level. It is assumed that the AUV carries a side-scan sonar. The mine-hunting environment plays an important role in the performance of side-scan sonar, as it does for any mine countermeasures (MCM) sensor. The chapter examines search patterns, including lawn-mowing, zigzagging, and random searches. The measures of effectiveness (MOEs) of the first two patterns were evaluated through the use of a stochastic model and a deterministic one, whose outcomes were verified to be consistent. Based on the assumed measures of performance (MOPs), the chapter demonstrates that the 2MU search pattern provides the best probability of detection as a function of search time.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.232
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUnderwater Vehicles and Communication SystemsFrench-language works237,207