Estuarine forcing of a river plume by river flow and tides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estuarine forcing of a river plume by river discharge and tides is examined with a novel data set capable of characterizing semidiurnal to annual time scales. An instrumented ferry made high‐resolution salinity measurements as it crossed the Fraser River plume, British Columbia, Canada, eight times per day over the years 2003–2006. The relative contribution of different forcing factors in controlling the river plume salinity and surface area is examined over the full range of time scales. A Lomb‐Scargle periodogram of the plume salinity shows energy concentrated in the semidiurnal and diurnal tidal bands. Diurnal lines contain more energy relative to semidiurnal lines than the respective tidal constituents would suggest. At fortnightly frequencies, local maxima in plume salinity coincide with periods of maxima in daily tidal height, with no phase shift. Thus the estuary adjusts quickly to changes in forcing. The effectiveness of tides in setting the plume salinity is a function of river discharge and is greatest when the river discharge is high and minimal when the river discharge is low. Tidal effects are superimposed onto the long‐period river discharge cycle. At time scales of 25 days or longer, the mean river plume salinity decreases quasi‐linearly with increasing river discharge, but the change in salinity with river discharge is instantaneous to within the sampling resolution. Plume surface area increases with river discharge, from 200–500 km 2 at low river flow to 1000–1500 km 2 at high river flow. The magnitude of the surface area is predicted well by scaling the mouth deformation radius.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".