MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2622337155 · doi:10.1121/1.4987503

Susy, Seascan, and other acoustical contraptions

2017· article· en· W2622337155 on OpenAlexaff
Mark V. Trevorrow

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAcousticsSonarHydrophoneGeologyWidebandOceanographyMarine engineeringSeismologyRemote sensingMeteorologyPhysicsEngineeringOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the early 1990s, the acoustical oceanography research group, led by Dr. David Farmer, developed several high-frequency sonar platforms for near-surface oceanography. These platforms, suspended approximately 25 m below the surface, typically supported six frequencies of upward-looking echo-sounders and up to four steerable 100 kHz sidescan sonars. Additionally, the SUSY platform had four extensible arms, 4.5 m in length, each supporting a wideband hydrophone. The platforms had sufficient batteries and data recording for up to 40 hours of autonomous operation, which could be extended through scheduled on/off periods. The intent of these platforms was to investigate properties of near-surface bubble due to breaking waves, with additional Doppler velocity measurements of surface waves and convective circulations. These platforms were also used for other studies, such as tidal convergence zones and ship wakes. The SEACAN platform was also used to assess zooplankton and fish populations in lake in Japan. This presentation will review key field trials and scientific achievements generated through use of these platforms.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.004

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207