MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911950555 · doi:10.5555/3320516.3320968

Optimisation of naval gun firing patterns for engagement of manoeuvring surface tagrgets

2018· article· en· W2911950555 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueWinter Simulation Conference · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicScientific Measurement and Uncertainty Evaluation
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaCanadian Armed Forces
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaxima and minimaGaussianMathematical optimizationFunction (biology)Computer scienceSurface (topology)Applied mathematicsMathematicsPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The problem of determining optimal naval gun firing patterns for engagement of manoeuvring surface targets using traditional simulation approaches is computationally intensive, particularly for large salvo sizes. A simplified modelling technique based on representing warhead effects using Gaussian function approximations calibrated from more detailed modelling is reported here. The simplified model permits the parameter space defining lay-down of rounds in a firing pattern to be searched so as to determine optimal patterns that maximise salvo probability of kill. The method employs Newton’s method to formulate a system of equations defining local extrema, which are then solved using Gaussian elimination. These extrema are then searched to obtain the pattern that maximises salvo kill probability. This paper presents the underlying theory and gives initial results obtained using the model calibrated for an illustrative example from a more detailed model.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.383
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.507
GPT teacher head0.477
Teacher spread0.030 · 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