MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2557935046 · doi:10.4043/27366-ms

Application of Upcrossing Rate Methodology to Local Design of Icebreaking Vessels

2016· article· en· W2557935046 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Technology Conference · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources Engineering
FundersHibernia Management and Development CompanyResearch and Development Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador
KeywordsHullEngine roomEvent (particle physics)Marine engineeringProbabilistic logicEnvironmental scienceStatisticsEngineeringStructural engineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Design of icebreaking vessels or ice-capable vessels must include consideration of extreme local ice pressures and exposure. Application of probabilistic methods used for data analysis, and then directly applied in design, with consideration of exposure is most useful. The Maximum Event (ME) Method is formulated for cases where ramming of ice is the dominant event. The peak pressures on a hull panel through the ram duration for each ram event is modelled. Data for each panel area are ranked and an exponential distribution fit to the tail of the ranked data. For design, we are then concerned with the maximum of n events expected in a specified period of time (e.g., a year). The random occurrence of ice along a route will also translate in to an annual number of expected impacts depending on ice and vessel dimensions. Vessel Ice classes would correspond to an annual number of impact events. This approach was used during the Arctic Shipping Pollution Prevention Regulation (ASPPR) revisions to validate maximum forces for different class vessels (e.g., a CAC4 vessel would be designed for 10-15 rams per year). For continuous-type interactions (e.g., a large floe crushing around a stationary vessel, or continuous icebreaking) an alternative approach is to use the Up-crossing Rate (UCR) Method. The number of local pressure upcrossings above a specific threshold on a particular panel area within a specified time (e.g., one year of operation) is determined. Exceedance curves for the UCR for increasing pressures on incremental panel areas are determined including an exponential fit to the tail of the distribution. For design, one only needs duration of interactions with the specified ice conditions through the year. The methodology was exercised to estimate local pressure parameters for transit segments during the ODEN 1991 trials. The greater the number of impact events and the longer the event duration, the greater the local pressures on panel areas. These high pressure zones occur and disappear, randomly shifting in location and intensity as fracture and spalling processes reshape the interaction area. For future development of the ISO design code, it is recommended that two modeling approaches be considered, the traditional ME method for short duration events and the UCR method for continuous interactions. The UCR method provides a simple means to design icebreaking vessels for extreme local pressures during continuous interactions. The method is also attractive for design of a stationkeeping vessel operating in broken ice where modeling individual floe interactions is not practical.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.775
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.241 · 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