MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400289005 · doi:10.1121/10.0027103

Energy density source levels of underwater explosive charges

2024· article· en· W4400289005 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ross Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnergetic Materials and Combustion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExplosive materialUnderwaterEnvironmental scienceEnergy densityGeologyPhysicsGeographyEngineering physicsOceanographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents experimental measurements of energy density source levels of small explosive charges for high frequencies to 18 kHz. The experiments were carried out using Signals Underwater Sound (SUS) charges deployed at a deep water site in a coastal fiord north of Vancouver BC. The waveform of an underwater explosion is characterized by a high intensity shock wave signal followed by a series of bubble pulses of decreasing intensity. The bubble pulses dominate the SUS energy density spectrum at frequencies below 1 kHz, but at higher frequencies the spectrum is dominated by the characteristics of the decay envelope of the shock wave signal. The explosive material in SUS charges is packed in a thin cylindrical cavity, resulting in a non-uniform decay envelope with secondary pulses when detonated, and a non-spherical distribution of the radiated sound. The impact of the cylindrical charge shape on energy density source level was investigated experimentally. Data were recorded for SUS deployments that generated in-line and broadside sound propagation to the receiver with respect to the axis of the cylindrical charge. Experimental measurements indicate significant differences in the high frequency SUS energy density spectrum depending upon the SUS and receiver geometry.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.852
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicEnergetic Materials and CombustionFrench-language works237,207