Second order waves before and after the floor work in the OEB in 2010 : Part A
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a continuation of the work reported in TR-2011-16. In summer 2010, the south-west side trenches (0.4m x 0.3m) under and in front of the wave makers in the OEB have been permanently filled-up to provide a homogeneous bottom and uniform water depth all over the basin. This work is to understand the improvement of the wave quality after the floor work. Two sets of experimental data comprised of mono- and bi-chromatic waves before and after the floor work are used to identify the impact of the development work on the generation of unwanted second order free waves in the OEB. In this report results are compared between the measured energies at different probe locations and also second order wave components before and after the floor work in the OEB. Comparisons are shown in terms of measured wave energies, primary waves, bounded waves and unwanted second order free waves elevations. In this report 0.4m, 0.5m and 0.6m of water depth is considered. In most of the cases it is observed from the results that the shallower the wave the better the wave quality after the floor work.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".