MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6910548002 · doi:10.4224/17210702

Shallow water wave correction in the OEB (monochromatic and bichromatic waves)

2010· report· en· W6910548002 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2010
Typereport
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWave shoalingSurface waveMechanical waveRayleigh waveLongitudinal waveWave propagationCross-polarized wave generationFree surfaceHarmonics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work first order and second order wave generation techniques are utilized to study the correct generation of mono and bichromatic waves in the OEB. For a flat bottom wave basin when the interaction between two frequencies are considered bounded sub harmonics or bounded low frequency waves are generated at the difference frequency and bounded super harmonics or bounded high frequency waves are generated at the sum frequency and they travel locked with their generating / fundamental wave components along with some unwanted free waves. These free waves are, free waves due to first order motion of the wave boards, free wave due to displacement of the wave board from its zero position and free wave due to local disturbances. These unwanted free waves are inevitable due to the linear motion of the wave maker. The second order wave generation technique includes second order board motion and correction components of the above-mentioned unwanted free waves. In this study only sub-harmonics or low frequency wave components are considered. Total 14 wave probes are used to capture the data in the wave tank. A NRC-IOT code (LWAVE) is used to isolate the primary waves, the bounded waves and the unwanted free waves from the measured data at each wave probe. The measured data are analyzed in this paper to illustrate the differences in the waves generated by two different generation techniques.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.240 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→French-language works237,207→