Second order wave generation in the OEB II
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When first-order natural waves are reproduced in the laboratory using the first order wave generation technique, the primary waves and their locked bounded waves are generated along with some unwanted free waves. Those free waves are evidently generated and propagate towards the test model and reflect from the boundaries. The free waves, having the same frequency of the bounded wave are reproduced, as the boundary conditions of the wave paddle are not properly satisfied up to second-order. The other two types of free waves are due to the wave paddle displacement and local disturbances. These so-called free waves cause an amplification of low frequency and/or high frequency wave phenomena, such as harbour resonance and oscillations of moored ships and, propagation and breaking of waves on floating or fixed structures that may exert huge hydrodynamic loads. The so-called second order wave generation technique could eliminate these alleged free waves. In this experiment second order wave generation technique is successfully used to reproduce the correct bounded waves along with elimination of the unwanted free waves from the wave profiles. This experiment is implemented by means of compensating free waves imposed on the system by second-order paddle motion. The control signal for this motion has to be introduced along with the primary waves.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".