MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046790500

Friction Correction for Model Ship Resistance and Propulsion Tests in Ice

2017· article· en· W3046790500 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEngineering Applied Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropulsionMarine engineeringResistance (ecology)Sea iceEnvironmental scienceGeologyMeteorologyEngineeringAerospace engineeringClimatologyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper documents the result of a preliminary analysis on the influence of hull-ice friction coefficient on model resistance and power predictions and their correlation to full-scale measurements. The study is based on previous model-scale/full-scale correlations performed on the National Research Council - Ocean, Coastal, and River Engineering’s (NRC-OCRE) model test data. There are two objectives for the current study: (1) to validate NRC-OCRE’s modeling standards in regarding to its practice of specifying a CFC (Correlation Friction Coefficient) of 0.05 for all its ship models; and (2) to develop a correction methodology for its resistance and propulsion predictions when the model is prepared with an ice friction coefficient slightly deviated from the CFC of 0.05. The mean CFC of 0.057 and 0.050 for perfect correlation as computed from the resistance and power analysis, respectively, have justified NRC-OCRE’s selection of 0.05 for the CFC of all its models. Furthermore, a procedure for minor friction corrections is developed.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.278

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.248 · 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