MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6910350475 · doi:10.4224/12340966

Scientific basis for Ice Regime System: March 2000 update

2000· report· en· W6910350475 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2000
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council CanadaCanadian Wood Council
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNumeral systemThe arcticWork (physics)Lead (geology)Class (philosophy)Arctic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This report provides an update on the work being carried out by the Canadian Hydraulics Centre of the NRC, to put the Arctic Ice Regime Shipping System (AIRSS) on a scientific basis. Although the project is not complete, significant progress has been made towards its intended goal. This report is meant to highlight the progress, and to lead to a focused discussion in the marine community on the final form for the ice regime system. The process of putting the ice regime system on a scientific basis involves a systematic approach using empirical data in a pragmatic format. The report provides details of vessel damage, and shows the agreement of the current definition of the Ice Numeral with available full-scale data. It has been found that although the system reasonably well reflects the observations, there are numerous instances where the agreement is poor. An advanced scheme has been proposed which takes into account the “interaction” aspects of vessels in ice-covered waters. Using this approach, a significant improvement in the definition of the ice numeral can be achieved. This approach further “rewards” high ice class vessels with experienced Ice Navigators operating in a prudent manner, and still “penalizes” low ice class vessels, especially in the presence of multi-year ice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.024
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.024
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0100.008
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.010

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→French-language works237,207→