MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1912654861 · doi:10.1016/s0967-0653(97)80754-5

10.1016/s0967-0653(97)80754-5

2000· article· en· W1912654861 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kevin J. Tillotson, Paul D. Komar

Bibliographic record

VenueTime to knit · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHindcastBuoyMicroseismSignificant wave heightGeologyWind waveWave heightMeteorologyWaves and shallow waterClimatologyOceanographyEnvironmental scienceSeismologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wave data for the Pacific Northwest of the United States have been derived from four measurement systems and from wave-hindcast techniques. Direct measurements have come from deep-water buoys of the National Data Buoy Center (NDBC) of NOAA and from shallow-water directional arrays and deep-water buoys installed by the Coastal Data Information Program (CDIP) of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography. The longest series of wave measurements for the Northwest coast has been obtained with a microseismometer system, a technique based on the measurement of microseisms produced by ocean waves. According to theoretical analyses, the microseisms are generated by the pressure field associated with standing waves produced by wave reflection from the coastline. This theory is substantiated by the data collected on the Oregon coast in confirming the expected correlations between the amplitudes and periods of the microseisms and the corresponding ocean-wave parameters. In addition to these direct measurements, wave data also are available from the Wave Information Study (WIS) of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, derived from hindcasts based on daily weather charts spanning the years 1956 to 1975. There are some systematic differences between the data sets. The deep-water NOBC buoy tends to yield higher significant wave heights than do the two CDIP buoys; a statistical regression of daily measurements indicates that heights reported by the NOBC buoy are 8% higher. The microseismometer system yields significant wave heights that are in good agreement with the buoy data, but measurements of wave periods are poor. The WIS hindcast data systematically overestimate wave heights, being some 30 to 60 percent larger than measured by the microseismometer and deep-water buoys. The wave data for the Northwest coast establish that during summer months, deep-water significant wave heights range 1.25 to 1.75 meters, increasing on average to 2.0 to 3.0 meters during the winter. Wave periods are on the order of 5 to 10 seconds in the summer when generation is more local, increasing to 10 to 20 seconds during the winter when storm systems are further from the coast and are larger. Major winter storms typically generate waves with deep-water significant heights from 6 to greater than 7 meters, with the calculated equivalent wave-breaker conditions on Northwest beaches reaching heights of 9 to 10 meters. The series of data sets account for the wave conditions on the Northwest coast, data which can be used to establish the extreme-wave parameters. Due to the systematic differences between the directly measured waves and hindcasts by WIS, these data sets had to be analyzed separately. Combining the CDIP deep-water buoy measurements and the microseismometer data, 24 storms with deep-water wave heights in excess of 6 meters were identified within the 23-year total record, with the largest recorded significant wave height having been 7.3 meters. Based on those storm-wave occurrences, extreme-wave analyses yielded a significant wave height of 7.8 meters for the 50-year storm, a statistically reliable estimate, and a less reliable value of 8.2 meters for the 100-year storm.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)1.0000.999

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.150
Teacher spread0.145 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations58
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTime to knitSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207