MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2959510169 · doi:10.3390/jmse7070213

Assessing the Unreliability of Systems during the Early Operation Period of a Ship—A Case Study

2019· article· en· W2959510169 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Leszek Chybowski, K. Gawdzińska, Rafał Laskowski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Marine Science and Engineering · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTechnical Engine Diagnostics and Monitoring
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIndependent Electricity System OperatorMinisterstwo Edukacji i Nauki
KeywordsCrewFailure mode and effects analysisReliability engineeringComponent (thermodynamics)Variety (cybernetics)HydrometeorologyComputer scienceService (business)Marine engineeringForensic engineeringEngineeringAeronauticsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sea-going ships are unique systems, and each ship—even those which are mass-produced—are different. Once in service, they are subjected to unique environmental exposure due to a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, their mode of operation, sailing area, cargo, hydrometeorological conditions, crew training, etc. This makes it very difficult, if not impossible, to compare individual units. The aim of this study is to present the damage data and analysis of a selected vessel—a complex technical system—during its first year of operation. To that end, the paper analyses the unreliability of a bulk cargo ship’s technical and energetic system components during its first year of operation. The paper also introduces the failure susceptibility of its technical systems, defines concepts of wear and failure and describes the object of analysis. Observed failures in subsystem components of the marine power plant, in the general systems and in the technological system of the ship, were presented in tabular form. Each failure was described by considering the time of operation until the first failure, type of failure, type of wear, nature of an event and methods used to regain efficiency. Selected failures were described in great detail, and the statistics of the ship’s components’ susceptibility to failure were presented by considering the wear type that caused a failure, the component type and the time to the first failure. Additionally the severity of each failure is discussed. Finally, conclusions regarding the susceptibility to failure of particular ship components were presented.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations16
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Marine Science and EngineeringSame topicTechnical Engine Diagnostics and MonitoringFrench-language works237,207