MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001705962 · doi:10.1063/1.2205916

Solitary water wave interactions

2006· article· en· W2001705962 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsAmplitudeMechanicsCollisionInelastic collisionClassical mechanicsPerfect fluidResidualQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article concerns the pairwise nonlinear interaction of solitary waves in the free surface of a body of water lying over a horizontal bottom. Unlike solitary waves in many completely integrable model systems, solitary waves for the full Euler equations do not collide elastically; after interactions, there is a nonzero residual wave that trails the post-collision solitary waves. In this report on new numerical and experimental studies of such solitary wave interactions, we verify that this is the case, both in head-on collisions (the counterpropagating case) and overtaking collisions (the copropagating case), quantifying the degree to which interactions are inelastic. In the situation in which two identical solitary waves undergo a head-on collision, we compare the asymptotic predictions of Su and Mirie [J. Fluid Mech. 98, 509 (1980)] and Byatt-Smith [J. Fluid Mech. 49, 625 (1971)], the wavetank experiments of Maxworthy [J. Fluid Mech. 76, 177 (1976)], and the numerical results of Cooker, Weidman, and Bale [J. Fluid Mech. 342, 141 (1997)] with independent numerical simulations, in which we quantify the phase change, the run-up, and the form of the residual wave and its Fourier signature in both small- and large-amplitude interactions. This updates the prior numerical observations of inelastic interactions in Fenton and Rienecker [J. Fluid Mech. 118, 411 (1982)]. In the case of two nonidentical solitary waves, our precision wavetank experiments are compared with numerical simulations, again observing the run-up, phase lag, and generation of a residual from the interaction. Considering overtaking solitary wave interactions, we compare our experimental observations, numerical simulations, and the asymptotic predictions of Zou and Su [Phys. Fluids 29, 2113 (1986)], and again we quantify the inelastic residual after collisions in the simulations. Geometrically, our numerical simulations of overtaking interactions fit into the three categories of Korteweg-deVries two-soliton solutions defined in Lax [Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 21, 467 (1968)], with, however, a modification in the parameter regime. In all cases we have considered, collisions are seen to be inelastic, although the degree to which interactions depart from elastic is very small. Finally, we give several theoretical results: (i) a relationship between the change in amplitude of solitary waves due to a pairwise collision and the energy carried away from the interaction by the residual component, and (ii) a rigorous estimate of the size of the residual component of pairwise solitary wave collisions. This estimate is consistent with the analytic results of Schneider and Wayne [Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 53, 1475 (2000)], Wright [SIAM J. Math. Anal. 37, 1161 (2005)], and Bona, Colin, and Lannes [Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal. 178, 373 (2005)]. However, in light of our numerical data, both (i) and (ii) indicate a need to reevaluate the asymptotic results in Su and Mirie [J. Fluid Mech. 98, 509 (1980)] and Zou and Su [Phys. Fluids 29, 2113 (1986)].

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.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.190 · 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