MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2613018429

Analysis of Hydrodynamic Interaction Between HMCS FREDERICTON and USNS KANAWHA

2012· article· en· W2613018429 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kevin McTaggart

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Navigation and Safety
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOceanographyFroude numberEnvironmental scienceFlow (mathematics)GeologyMechanicsPhysics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract : HMCS FREDERICTON collided with USNS KANAWHA on 18 November 2010 while FREDERICTON was approaching KANAWHA for replenishment at sea. The ships were in calm water of depth greater than 600 m. VENTURE Naval Officers Training Centre (NOTC) requested that DRDC Atlantic investigate whether hydrodynamic interactions between the two ships contributed to the occurrence of the collision. It is unlikely that hydrodynamic interaction effects were a factor in causing a collision between FREDERICTON and KANAWHA. In the present report, the non-dimensional lateral separation is defined as the lateral separation distance divided by the beam of the larger ship. FREDERICTON and KANAWHA had a non-dimensional lateral separation of 3.0 when FREDERICTON commenced unexpected motion behaviour. Available data suggest that hydrodynamic interaction forces at the onset of unexpected motion behaviour were likely less than 10 percent of hydrodynamic interaction forces that would have been experienced when closer to the alongside refueling position. During replenishment operations, ships typically have forward speed Froude numbers less than 0.2. Under such conditions, wave-making effects will be small, simplifying analysis of flow conditions.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.430
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMaritime Navigation and SafetyFrench-language works237,207