MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996927417 · doi:10.1029/2011jc007390

Statistics of surface divergence and their relation to air‐water gas transfer velocity

2012· article· en· W1996927417 on OpenAlexaff
William E. Asher, Hanzhuang Liang, Christopher J. Zappa, Mark Loewen, Moniz A. Mukto, Trina M. Litchendorf, Andrew T. Jessup

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceDivergence (linguistics)Particle image velocimetryMechanicsMeteorologyEnvironmental sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Air‐sea gas fluxes are generally defined in terms of the air/water concentration difference of the gas and the gas transfer velocity, k L . Because it is difficult to measure k L in the ocean, it is often parameterized using more easily measured physical properties. Surface divergence theory suggests that infrared (IR) images of the water surface, which contain information concerning the movement of water very near the air‐water interface, might be used to estimate k L . Therefore, a series of experiments testing whether IR imagery could provide a convenient means for estimating the surface divergence applicable to air‐sea exchange were conducted in a synthetic jet array tank embedded in a wind tunnel. Gas transfer velocities were measured as a function of wind stress and mechanically generated turbulence; laser‐induced fluorescence was used to measure the concentration of carbon dioxide in the top 300 μ m of the water surface; IR imagery was used to measure the spatial and temporal distribution of the aqueous skin temperature; and particle image velocimetry was used to measure turbulence at a depth of 1 cm below the air‐water interface. It is shown that an estimate of the surface divergence for both wind‐shear driven turbulence and mechanically generated turbulence can be derived from the surface skin temperature. The estimates derived from the IR images are compared to velocity field divergences measured by the PIV and to independent estimates of the divergence made using the laser‐induced fluorescence data. Divergence is shown to scale with k L values measured using gaseous tracers as predicted by conceptual models for both wind‐driven and mechanically generated turbulence.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score0.624

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.260 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207