Use of Simulations to Predict Lifeboat Survivability in Extreme Waves and the Effectiveness of Coxswain Performed Actions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simulations were used to investigate the performance of lifeboats in high sea states using a virtual wave tank. Numerical simulations were performed in regular and irregular waves to study launch performance in extreme weather conditions. Limitations in launch equipment and the role of the timing of coxswains’ actions were investigated. The study indicated that the lifeboat may not be able to successfully launch when significant wave heights are above 8 m and the lifeboat is launched near the trough of a wave. High initial setback and continuous wave forces result in the vessel being unable to clear away from the launch platform. As wave heights increase, the amount of setback and time to exit the launch area increases. Over 35% of launches resulted in the lifeboat being unable to clear from the launch area when significant wave heights were 10 m or above. The study also identified that delay in completion of actions performed by the coxswain, such as releasing the lifeboat hooks and applying throttle, can increase setback and time to exit the launch area.
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 | 0.001 | 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".