Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous numerical simulations have shown that in a bounded fluid, internal solitary waves with trapped cores become horizontally uniform in their center and have a maximum amplitude that is dependent on the details of the recirculating flow inside the core [K. G. Lamb, “A numerical investigation of solitary internal waves with trapped cores formed via shoaling,” J. Fluid Mech. 451, 109 (2002)]. The flow in the horizontally uniform center of these waves is called a conjugate flow. Here a theoretical model for conjugate flows with a trapped core (also called a vortex core) is presented. The flow in the core is assumed to be steady with constant density. General expressions for arbitrary nonuniform core vorticity are developed which depend on the surface velocity and the mean squared horizontal velocity in the core. Analytic results for cores with constant vorticity are presented for a two-layer fluid with constant density in the lower layer and constant buoyancy frequency in the upper layer. Comparisons of the theory with time-dependent numerical simulations of waves with flat-centered trapped cores in exponential density profiles are made. The theoretical results are shown to accurately predict the amplitude and core thickness of the conjugate flows when the values of the surface velocity and mean squared velocity are taken from the simulations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".