MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4229453195 · doi:10.1121/10.0010617

Coupled modeling of the seasonal transmission loss in the Beaufort Sea

2022· article· en· W4229453195 on OpenAlexaff
David R. Barclay, S. B. Martin, Paul C. Hines, Pablo Borys, Calder L. Robinson, James D. Hamilton, Terry J. Deveau

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKeelSea iceGeologyArcticArctic ice packTransmission lossBeaufort seaRemote sensingMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceGeodesyClimatologyComputer scienceOceanographyTelecommunicationsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An eight-element drifting vertical line array was deployed overwinter 2019–20 in the Beaufort Sea to record transmissions from two moored 35 Hz sources deployed as part of the Coordinated Arctic Acoustic Thermometry Experiment (CAATEX), and seven 925 Hz sources deployed by the Arctic Mobile Observing Systems (AMOS) experiment. Transmissions were received every day on the array at ranges of 10 to 850 km. A probabilistic rough-ice canopy was integrated to a Parabolic Equation code to predict the propagation loss. Sound speed profiles and percent ice cover along the propagation paths were obtained at daily resolution from data-assimilative Global Ice Ocean Prediction System (GIOPS, 20 km spatial resolution). Sea ice roughness and keel properties are empirically determined from the GIOPS ice thickness. The ice roughness is generated using a random pulse-train model with a characteristic wavenumber spectrum slope determined by ice age. Empirical probability distributions of ice keel depth, slope, and spatial densities are used to randomly add keels. Spatial averaging is used to account for signal bandwidth and uncertainty in receiver positions. The environment files and modeling are performed in piece-wise steps to manage memory footprints over long ranges. Modeled propagation losses compare well with the data and reproduce the seasonal variability observed in the measured results.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.186
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→