MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6980234258

A BIBLIOMETRIC REVIEW OF RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS ON DIGITAL TWINPREDICTIVE MAINTENANCE SYSTEMS IN THE MARITIME INDUSTRY

2024· article· en· W6980234258 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDigital Transformation in Industry
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMitacsKing Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodTSG101DiafiltrationHyporeflexiaProteogenomicsHemopericardiumArticular cartilage damage
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This bibliometric review delves into the topic of “Digital Twin Predictive Maintenance System in the Maritime Industry,” examining existing research to identify trends and potential avenues for future exploration. Through analysis of 12 data clusters (consisting of 1,074 publications) from maritime sources, this study uncovers significant growth in interest from 2016 onwards and synthesizes key findings from the historical evolution of Digital Twins. The review highlights various research clusters, including advancements in Digital Twin technology, Smart Manufacturing applications, and the integration of Blockchain. By using bibliometric techniques, the study maps country collaborations and illustrates international research networks in this field. It also highlights the most cited papers, underlining influential contributions and their impact. This comprehensive review offers a unique perspective on the development, collaborations, and key research themes in the context of Digital Twin Predictive Maintenance Systems within the maritime industry.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Review
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.1510.252
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

Bibliometrics

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Other design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMemorial University Research Repository (Memorial University)Same topicDigital Transformation in IndustryCategoryBibliometricsFrench-language works237,207