MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2370550549

Comparison of Processing Technique for Multibeam Echosoundings Residual Refraction

2010· article· en· W2370550549 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
QU Xiao-juan

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrographic Surveying and Charting · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFlow Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefractionResidualComputer scienceSoftwareGeologyRemote sensingOpticsAlgorithmPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to solve the residual artifacts in the swath affected by sound refraction,there are two of tools in the Caris HIPS multibeam data processing software of Canada,one is traditional SVP correction tool,another is refraction correction tool.The refraction correction tool is very easy to use,and the correction effect is WYSWYG,which can eliminate the artifacts caused by sound refraction rapidly.The purpose of this article is to make a comparison of the effect of using the tools with actual multibeam dataset.

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)0.004
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.271 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrographic Surveying and ChartingSame topicFlow Measurement and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207