MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2546481337 · doi:10.1109/oceans.2004.1406330

The capabilities of Doppler current profilers for directional wave measurements in coastal and nearshore waters

2005· article· en· W2546481337 on OpenAlexaffabout
Rick Birch, David B. Fissel, Keath Borg, V. Lee, David English

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsASL Environmental Sciences (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcoustic Doppler current profilerDoppler effectCurrent (fluid)Wave heightGeologyRemote sensingWind waveSignificant wave heightInstrumentation (computer programming)OceanographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The adaptation of Doppler current profilers to measure directional wave spectra has provided a new instrumentation approach to coastal and nearshore oceanographic studies. Past studies have shown favorable comparisons between Doppler current profiler wave instruments with bottom mounted PUV (pressure-velocity) sensors sampling at wave frequencies and wave buoys. In this paper, we examine the capabilities and limitations of two different Doppler current profilers for directional wave measurements in shallow coastal waters of 0-25 m water depth. Data collection programs using Doppler current profilers for wave measurements have been conducted for one month long periods in the early spring of 2002, 2003 and 2004 on Roberts Bank in the Fraser River foreslope region of the Strait of Georgia, British Columbia, Canada. In 2004, an RD Instrument ADCP along with the newly-released 1000 kHz Nortek AWAC current profiler and wave instrument were co-located in 7 m water depth at a different site on the edge of Roberts Bank. Inter-comparisons between these bottom mounted instruments are used to examine the capabilities of the directional wave spectral parameters, in terms of: resolvable frequencies for directional and nondirectional wave spectra; wave directional resolution and reliability, and limitations arising from the use of linear wave theory. For a preliminary assessment of the capability of Doppler wave spectra in deeper waters of 20-25 m depths, in particular for very long wave periods, some experiences derived from a long-term measurement program being conducted off the west coast of Africa are presented

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.074
GPT teacher head0.280
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 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

Citations16
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207