MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010047059 · doi:10.1175/2009jpo4204.1

Observation of a Fast Continental Shelf Wave Generated by a Storm Impacting Newfoundland Using Wavelet and Cross-Wavelet Analyses

2009· article· en· W2010047059 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Severin Thiebaut, Ross Vennell

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Oceanography · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBarotropic fluidGeologyContinental shelfStormOceanographyAmplitudeWaveletTide gaugeSeismologyGeodesySea levelPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Wavelet and cross-wavelet power spectra of sea level records from tide gauges along the Atlantic coast of Canada showed a low-frequency barotropic response after Hurricane Florence crossed the Newfoundland shelf in September 2006. In comparison with two other storms, the results showed that Florence was the only one that excited a propagating sea level disturbance with a period range similar to the passage time of the storm over the shelf (26–30 h) and phase shifts consistent with a barotropic continental shelf wave (CSW). The high amplitude of the oscillations generated by Florence along the shore diminished from approximately 45 to 12 cm as the CSW propagated from the south coast of Newfoundland to the southern Nova Scotia seaboard. This paper presents the first direct measurement of a remarkably high alongshore group speed (11.4 ± 5.9 m s−1), in the manner of free-barotropic CSW, by examination of sea level wavelet power spectra at different locations. Furthermore, using cross-wavelet analysis of pairs of stations, an exceptional phase speed of 16.0 ± 5.1 m s−1 has been found, greater than had been previously observed for a free CSW. The results were consistent with dispersion curves for the first-mode barotropic CSW.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations44
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical OceanographySame topicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones ResearchFrench-language works237,207