MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297796029 · doi:10.15485/1618871

Department of Defense (DoD) Marine Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) Site Database

2009· dataset· en· W4297796029 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jack L. Foley, Gregory Schulltz, Tom Glenn

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2009
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMilitary Strategy and Technology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnexploded ordnanceEngineeringDatabaseGeographyComputer scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The majority of the DoD’s UXO detection and discrimination technology development efforts in the past have focused on terrestrial (land-based) areas that were used for testing and training. DoD munitions testing and training operations, as well as past disposal operations, also have been conducted in marine, estuarine, and other underwater environments. Potential human contact with underwater ordnance at or near these sites can include direct contact when swimming, diving, wading, or through indirect contact like anchoring, fishing, or dredging. Site-specific factors such as water depth, turbidity, temperature, tidal actions, currents, storms, and bottom conditions present unique challenges that can significantly hinder the use of conventional UXO technologies at underwater sites. The database includes information on site locations and ranges, environmental conditions, munitions reported or suspected, and other site attribute information. The majority of the sites are formerly used ranges (Formerly Used Defense Sites [FUDS]), but the database also includes Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Sites, and active ranges. We focused on compiling data for sites within the United States or under the control of the DoD in some capacity. During our review of sites, we also compiled listings of international sites of concern. These include a loosely compiled set of sites from the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, Japan, Russia, Estonia, and Serbia and Montenegro.To use the database, Microsoft Access must be installed

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.012
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0560.048

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 head0.213
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicMilitary Strategy and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207