Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used a simple energy balance equation, and estimates of the cross‐shore energy flux carried by progressive surf beat, to calculate the rate of net surf beat forcing (or dissipation) on a beach near Duck, North Carolina. Far inside the surf zone, surf beat dissipation exceeded forcing. Outside the surf zone, surf beat forcing exceeded dissipation. When incident waves were large, surf beat dissipation inside the surf zone and forcing just outside the surf zone were both very strong (the surf beat energy dissipated in the surf zone in a single beat period was of the same order as the total amount of surf beat energy stored in the surf zone). During storms, shoreward propagation of surf beat maintained surf beat energy in the surf zone. Net surf beat dissipation in the surf zone scaled as predicted by a simple bottom stress parameterization. The inferred dissipation factor for surf beat was 0.08, within the range of wave dissipation factors usually observed in the field and 27–80 times larger than drag coefficients appropriate for the mean longshore current. The observed rapid forcing, rapid dissipation, and shoreward propagation of surf beat are not simulated by existing models of surf beat dynamics.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".