Effects of Different Hydrophone Sensitivities on Underwater Signal Measurement in the Test Tank
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Underwater acoustic research nowadays is very much needed to achieve mastery of technology in underwater communication systems. At this stage, there isn’t much literature on tropical seawater such as in Indonesia. To achieve these key technologies, it is necessary to master these supporting technologies. Instrumentation in communication systems using underwater acoustics signals must be calibrated through the preparation stage before being implemented in the ocean experiment. In this paper, underwater acoustic signals measurement results are compared to two different hydrophones with different sensitivities. The experiment was carried in the test tank of the Hydrodynamic Laboratory of BRIN, in order to investigate the performances of underwater acoustic instrumentation. Based on the test, it concluded that the hydrophone B, with sensitivity of -208dBV re 1μPa, has a higher sensitivity than another hydrophone A, with sensitivity of -180dB re 1V/μPa. This is proven by the ripple in the received signal from the hydrophone A. With the frequency variation in the transmitted sinusoidal signal, the hydrophone A has a negative correlation between the PSD and the frequency change with the value of 0,9947.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".