MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298346979 · doi:10.5957/icetech-2006-141

Estimating Probabilistic Iceberg Design Loads on Ships Navigating in Ice Covered Waters

2006· article· en· W4298346979 on OpenAlexaffabout
Freeman Ralph, Ian Jordaan, Phil Clark, Paul Stuckey

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicStructural Integrity and Reliability Analysis
Canadian institutionsHusky Energy (Canada)Centre For Cold Ocean Resources Engineering
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIcebergSubmarine pipelineSea iceArctic ice packArcticEnvironmental scienceMarine engineeringOceanographyMeteorologyGeologyEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marine operations in winter and early spring, on the East Coast of Canada, offshore Newfoundland and Labrador, are affected by the presence of sea ice and icebergs. Groups such as the Canadian Ice Service (CIS), International Ice Patrol (IIP) and PAL Environmental Services monitor and track ice movement to advise operators in the region of the risk of ice encounters. As an example, ice bulletins are produced to alert mariners of the number of icebergs one may expect to encounter while navigating in a particular region. Because of the risk of encounter with ice features, the design of vessels navigating in these waters must include an appropriate level of reinforcement, particularly in the bow, to withstand impact loads. Local and global loads may be estimated using probabilistic methods based on the encounter frequency and probability of a load given an impact. Further to this approach a methodology has been developed for estimating iceberg design loads along vessel routes in ice prone regions off the East Coast of Canada. Design loads are estimated for shuttle tankers navigating along example routes from the Grand Banks to market. Loads consider encounter rates along the route and detection and avoidance strategies. Results illustrate a significant reduction in risk and resultant loads if tactical avoidance strategies are incorporated into the design. This design methodology can be applied to other arctic regions where ice types include multi-year and ridged ice and where detection and avoidance can be used to reduce the encounter frequency and hence design loads.

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)0.005
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations1
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicStructural Integrity and Reliability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207