MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291289595 · doi:10.5957/icetech-2012-123

Classification of Icebreakers – Updates to Requirements

2012· article· en· W4291289595 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsMartec (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHullVariety (cybernetics)Work (physics)Computer scienceNaval architectureOperations researchSystems engineeringIndustrial engineeringEngineeringMarine engineeringArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lloyd’s Register (LR) is currently developing requirements for icebreakers. In support of this activity, a series of work programs have been undertaken to ensure alignment with current and future industry application. The work programs includes a re-evaluation of the classed fleet; a series of interactive workshops with icebreaker Captains representing a variety of ice covered sea areas of operation; and ship structural nonlinear finite element (FE) analyses. The objectives of these tasks were to validate current classifications requirements for ice going ships and compare as a basis a number of previous successful icebreaker designs with actual operations. Representative structural configurations (based upon actual icebreakers) were selected for detailed hull structural assessment and this was supplemented with detailed descriptions of the operations of the ships, provided by icebreaker Masters. This paper presents some of the results from the work programs of which elements are incorporated into the update to Lloyd's Register’s rule requirements for icebreakers.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.438
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.242 · 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