MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117579857 · doi:10.1121/10.0041892

Normal-incidence bottom and sub-bottom reflection in the Canada basin of the Arctic Ocean

2025· article· en· W7117579857 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicholas P. Chotiros, Matthew A. Dzieciuch

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice of Naval Research
KeywordsReflection (computer programming)SeabedArcticPopulationMooringSonarLatitudeOceanic basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The normal-incidence reflection coefficient of a patch of seabed in the Arctic Ocean was analyzed using the signal from a source colocated with a vertical line array. A mooring in the Canada Basin of the Arctic Ocean in approximately 4000 m water depth, contained a sound source 54.7 m below the water surface and a vertical receiving array below it. The source transmitted a pulsed sine wave at nominally 35 Hz once every 3 days for over a year. Bottom and sub-bottom reflected signals were clearly detected. The baseband demodulated signals were recorded and used in the analysis. The results showed that the bottom reflection was very stable at an average reflection loss of 13.5 dB, with an annual sinusoidal variation of 0.15 dB. Three sub-bottom returns were detected. The first is likely a bottom-simulating reflector with significant phase reversal, probably due to free gas beneath a hydrate layer. Fluctuations in the first and second sub-bottom returns are likely due to the changing bubble population beneath the hydrate layer. The third sub-bottom return was very strong and highly variable in both arrival time and amplitude, indicating a very rough sediment-basement interface.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.649

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207