Shoaling solitary internal waves: on a criterion for the formation of waves with trapped cores
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shoaling solitary internal waves are ubiquitous features in the coastal regions of the world's oceans where waves with a core of recirculating fluid (trapped cores) can provide an effective transport mechanism. Here, numerical evidence is presented which suggests that there is a close connection between the limiting behaviour of large-amplitude solitary waves and the formation of such waves via shoaling. For some background states, large-amplitude waves are broad, having a nearly horizontal flow in their centre. The flow in the centre of such waves is called a conjugate flow. For other background states, large-amplitude waves can reach the breaking limit, at which the maximum current in the wave is equal to the wave's propagation speed. The presence of a background current with near-surface vorticity of the same sign as that induced by the wave can change the limiting behaviour from the conjugate-flow limit to the breaking limit. Numerical evidence is presented here which suggests that if large solitary waves cannot reach the breaking limit in the shallow water, that is if the background flow has a conjugate flow, then waves with trapped cores will not be formed via shoaling. It is also shown that, due to a change in the limiting behaviour of large waves, an appropriate background current can enable the formation of waves with trapped cores in stratifications for which such waves are not formed in the absence of a background current.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".