MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2914779575 · doi:10.9753/icce.v36.papers.59

DESIGN AND PHYSICAL MODEL STUDIES OF INNOVATIVE LIVING BREAKWATERS

2018· article· en· W2914779575 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

VenueCoastal Engineering Proceedings · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBreakwaterBayMarine engineeringComputer scienceCivil engineeringEnvironmental scienceEngineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes two separate but closely related physical models conducted to support the detailed design of the Living Breakwaters project located in Raritan Bay, New York. One study focused on optimizing and verifying the breakwater design elements to ensure they were well adapted to typical and extreme conditions, while the second study focused on verifying the overall performance of multiple living breakwaters in terms of wave attenuation and impacts on nearshore wave-induced circulation. These investigations generated a large quantity of valuable information concerning the design and performance of the breakwaters that will be used to optimize and support the final design and obtain the necessary permits required for construction.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.604
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.199 · 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