MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132546662

ICEWEAR Program: influences on the ice-induced wear of concrete structures in polar marine environments

2022· article· en· W7132546662 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anne Barker, Bart Westerveld, Bob Tulp, Stephen Bruneau, Bruce Colbourne

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperimental researchPolarVariety (cybernetics)Materials testing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ICEWEAR is a five-year research program, seeking to improve knowledge of surface wear and surface friction influences on the ice-induced wear of concrete structures in polar marine environments. Through the program, a variety of research lines have examined these influences, through ice-concrete interaction laboratory testing, investigations of ice-concrete contact physics, wear reduction strategies and modelling and analysis. The ICEWEAR research program adds to previous research programs over the past five decades that have examined ice-concrete contact phenomena. It also goes further by investigating the hybridization of ASTM and other standardized testing procedures/equipment in order to design new, meaningful, robust ice-concrete tests that can be standardized to better-enable the comparison of results across research programs. This paper will present some of the outputs from the first of these lines of research, with examples of the construction, testing and optimization of new equipment for adhesion, friction, wear and impact ice-concrete contact studies. The paper considers the effects of experimental design, and in particular, the influence of time and pressure on the experimental results.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.215
Teacher spread0.203 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNPARC→Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→