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 OpenAlexaff
Peter J Young

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.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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

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 designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWinter Simulation ConferenceSame topicScientific Measurement and Uncertainty EvaluationFrench-language works237,207