MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300530679 · doi:10.5957/attc-2007-009

Modeling Paravanes for Seakeeping Tests of Fishing Vessels

2007· article· en· W4300530679 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ayhan Akintürk, David R. S. Cumming, D.W. Bass

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Navigation and Safety
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeakeepingMarine engineeringFishingFroude numberFocus (optics)HullComputer scienceEnvironmental scienceEngineeringOperations researchFisheryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a recent study to evaluate the occupational risks induced by ship motions on the fishing fleet of Newfoundland, a model of a 65’ fishing vessel fitted with paravanes was tested in the Offshore Engineering Basin (OEB) of IOT. This project was done under a larger umbrella community initiative called SafetyNet to evaluate health and safety issues of the fishing industry. The particular focus of this project was to evaluate motion induced interruptions onboard the fishing vessels for various operational scenarios. Paravanes are the most common motion reducing devices used on Newfoundland fishing vessels. Paravanes were initially modelled by scaling down both the geometry and the weight using Froude scaling laws. This modeling strategy proved to be unsuccessful and several modifications to the paravanes were required throughout the test program. This paper describes the model seakeeping tests done at IOT with particular focus on the challenges encountered in modeling the paravanes. Some of the model test, sea trial and numerical prediction results obtained with and without paravanes deployed are included in the paper.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.743
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMaritime Navigation and SafetyFrench-language works237,207