Overview of the 2012 Iceberg Profiling Program
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In June of 2012, a 25-day field program was carried out off the east coast of Newfoundland and Labrador with the objective of obtaining high quality 3D profiles of both grounded and freely floating icebergs. The motivation for collecting the data was to provide valuable information relating to the design of offshore platforms in iceberg-prone environments. Specifically, the data was originally acquired to provide insight regarding contact area growth as a function of penetration during a simulated impact with an offshore structure, and to assist in assessing the risk of topsides impact. The above water portion (sail) of the icebergs were profiled using photogrammetry while the below water portion of the icebergs (keel) were profiled using a multibeam system mounted on a remotely operated vehicle (ROV). The drift and rotation of the iceberg during the profiling process was derived using the above water photogrammetry, and was used to correct the below water multibeam data to account for the motion of freely floating icebergs. The drift and rotation was also used to merge the above and below water portions of the iceberg. An overview of the program and resulting data set is presented in this paper. Ultimately, twenty nine three dimensional iceberg profiles were obtained as a result of this work, providing significant improvements in the iceberg shape data available for input in the design of offshore platforms in regions where icebergs present a risk to these structures.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it