MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2470203143 · doi:10.5957/jsr.2011.55.2.73

Ship Motion and Wave Radar Data Fusion for Shipboard Wave Measurement

2011· article· en· W2470203143 on OpenAlexaffabout
D. C. Stredulinsky, Eric Thornhill

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ship Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicShip Hydrodynamics and Maneuverability
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeakeepingSea trialRadarWave radarWind waveShip motionsWave heightMarine engineeringNavyRemote sensingWind wave modelGeologyMeteorologyRadar engineering detailsComputer scienceEngineeringRadar imagingTelecommunicationsHullGeographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC) Atlantic has conducted many dedicated seakeeping and structural load trials on the Canadian Navy research ship CFAV Quest and on several Canadian Navy warships. Typically, wave buoys have been deployed to measure seaway wave characteristics; however, there has been an ongoing interest in evaluating shipboard wave measurement systems. These systems have some advantages over wave buoys for short-term trials and are needed for longer-term sea trials and to provide wave input data for tactical and real-time ship operator guidance systems. This paper presents some of our experiences with wave radar. In the last few years there have been significant advances in wave radar technology (systems that extract wave data from backscatter information contained in the video output of X-band navigational radar displays). Commercial "off-the-shelf" systems are now available. While there is evidence that these systems can provide reliable wave data from shore-based or stationary platform installations, it is DRDC's experience on a ship moving in waves, that wave radars can give good direction and frequency measurements but less reliable wave heights. DRDC has developed a method to improve shipboard wave height measurement through fusion of wave radar data with measured ship motion response data. This paper discusses the development of the wave data fusion process, validated through previous sea trial data, and presents the results of a recent demonstration of the approach during a sea trial conducted on CFAV Quest in November/December 2008.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.464
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.108 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations44
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ship ResearchSame topicShip Hydrodynamics and ManeuverabilityFrench-language works237,207