## 2 Data Generation  
The current section simply describes the details of the model test in the laboratory. Given the associated complexities for proof of concept, a simple geometrical shape was employed for running the test in the model basin. As a result, a uniform sphere has been deployed, which assisted in limiting the variables affecting the floating body motions, such as mooring lines and wave direction respective to the model.  
The experimental campaign has been carried out in the model test basin at the Australian Maritime College, National Centre for Maritime Engineering and Hydrodynamics (NCMEH). The 1:36 scaling factor was selected for geometry, while the Qualisys motion capture system was used to measure the sphere's six degrees of freedom (DOFs). The instruments sampled data at a rate of 200 Hz. Signals from the wave probes and load cell were converted to digital format via a 16-bit data acquisition (DAQ) board and then filtered using a 90 Hzantialising filter. The main goal was to accumulate a substantial volume of high-quality data. A 1:6 porous beach was positioned at the basin's att end to reduce wave reflections, as depicted in Figure 3. A single taut mooring securely held the model sphere from the basin floor to the sphere's bottom, as shown in Figure 4. This swivel setup allows the free motion of the sphere with respect to the incident waves. Detailed parameters of the experimental model are reflected in Table 1.  
To evaluate the proposed theoretical data analysis setup, two sets of data generations have been considered: deterministic inputs by regular waves and stochastic inputs by irregular waves with a distribution derived from the JONSWAP (Joint North Sea Wave Project) spectrum [21]. The regular wave test was carried out with an effective length of 75 s, whereas the time was extended to 40 min to cover sufficient spectral constitutions sampled from the JONSWAP spectrum for irregular waves. Table 2 presents the details of the input waves to the model with relevant parameters.  
More details about the experimental test setup can be found in [22]. ANSYS AQWA, which works on the potential wave theory, has been employed for simulation. To compute the hydrodynamic loads on a structure, the forces and moments on the body are determined by integrating the pressure normal to the surface of the floating body in a network of meshes. More details about the underlying formulation of wave and floating body dynamics can be found in [23; 24]. The same geometry has been used for simulation with respect to the primary purpose of the current study. Nevertheless, the simulation setup has been validated through a heavy decay test and replication of regular waves exciting the model. To run the free response stability test, so-called decay test, the model was released with a slight deviation from still water equilibrium, and the results were recorded. The heavy decay test is performed by measuring the force applied to the single mooring with a load cell installed on the swivel, according to Figure 4. Figure 5 indicates the results of the heavy decay test and regular wave test, indicating the difference between experiment and simulation, and as can be witnessed, despite slight disparities, the simulation results are reasonably consistent with the experimental findings, and the difference can be attributed to the mooring. So, data obtained from experiments and simulations have been processed in the next step for building up the proposed framework.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline
**Test Number** & **Condition** & **Target Wave Height** & **Measured Wave Height** & **Wave Period** & **Test Duration** \\ \hline
1 & Regular & 50 mm & 48.78 mm & 1.0 s–2.8 s & 75 s \\
2 & Irregular & 50 mm & 45.44 mm & 1.2 s–2.4 s & 40 min \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 2: Regular and irregular wave parameters.  
Figure 4: Swivel and load cell setup for heavy decay test.