Extra Tree Regression Algorithm for Simulation of Iceberg Draft and Subgouge Soil Characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the expansion of offshore and subsea infrastructure in Arctic and sub-Arctic regions, concerns are rising, driven by climate change and global warming, over the risk of drifting icebergs colliding with these structures in cold waters. Traditional methods for estimating iceberg underwater height and assessing subgouge soil properties, such as costly and time-consuming underwater surveys or centrifuge tests, are still used, but the industry continues to seek faster and more cost-efficient solutions. In this study, the extra tree regression (ETR) algorithm was employed for the first time to simultaneously model iceberg drafts and subgouge soil properties in both sandy and clay seabeds. The ETR approach first predicted the iceberg draft, then simulated subgouge soil reaction forces and deformations. A total of 22 ETR models were developed, incorporating parameters relevant to both iceberg draft estimation and subgouge soil characterization. The best-performing ETR models, along with the most influential input variables, were identified through a combination of sensitivity, error, discrepancy, and uncertainty analyses. The ETR model predicted iceberg draft with a high level of accuracy (R = 0.920, RMSE = 1.081), while the superior model for vertical reaction force in sand achieved an RMSE of 43.95 with 70% of predictions within 16% error. The methodology demonstrated improved prediction capacity over traditional techniques and can serve early-stage iceberg risk management.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".