MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125818097 · doi:10.3390/s21020612

Marine Icing Sensor with Phase Discrimination

2021· article· en· W3125818097 on OpenAlexaff
Abdulrazak Elzaidi, Vlastimil Masek, Stephen Bruneau

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIcing and De-icing Technologies
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersMinistry of Education, Libya
KeywordsIcingSIGNAL (programming language)Phase (matter)Layer (electronics)Signal processingDimension (graph theory)AcousticsField (mathematics)Decision treeTree (set theory)Biological systemRemote sensingComputer scienceElectronic engineeringEnvironmental scienceMaterials scienceMeteorologyEngineeringGeologyArtificial intelligencePhysicsMathematicsDigital signal processingNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a novel approach is presented to the measurement of marine icing phenomena under the presence of a two-phase condition. We have developed a sensor consisting of an electrostatic array and a signal processing based on a decision tree method. A three-element electrostatic array is employed to derive signals having linearly decoupled characteristics from which two key parameters, ice and water accretion layer dimension, can be determined for the purpose of environmental monitoring. The quantified characteristics revealed a correlation with the ice layer thickness in spite of the strong influence from the top water phase layer. The decision tree model established a relationship between the signal characteristics and the two accretion thickness parameters of water and ice layer. Through experimental verification, it has been observed that our sensor array in combination with the decision tree model based signal processing provides a simple practical solution to the challenging field of a two phase composition measurement such as in the marine icing considered in this study.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score0.383

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicIcing and De-icing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207