MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2014024041 · doi:10.1017/s0022112010005057

Continual skipping on water

2011· article· en· W2014024041 on OpenAlexaff
Ian Hewitt, Neil J. Balmforth, Jim McElwaine

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaddleLift (data mining)MechanicsMarine engineeringWaves and shallow waterEnvironmental scienceGeologyComputer sciencePhysicsEngineeringThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experiments are conducted to study the planing and skipping of a rectangular paddle on the surface of a shallow stream. The paddle is allowed to move freely up and down by attaching it to a pivoted arm. A steady planing state, in which the lift force from the water balances the weight on the paddle, is found to be stable for small stream velocities but to become unstable above a certain threshold velocity which depends upon the weight and the angle of attack. Above this threshold, the paddle oscillates in the water and can take off into a continual bouncing, or skipping, motion, with a well-defined amplitude and frequency. The transition is sometimes bistable so that both a steady planing state and a regular skipping state are possible for the same experimental parameters. Shallow-water theory is used to construct simple models that explain the qualitative features of the planing and skipping states in the experiments. It is found that a simple parameterisation of the lift force on the paddle proportional to the depth of entry is not sufficient to explain the observations, and it is concluded that the rise of water ahead of the paddle, in particular the way this varies over time, is responsible for causing the planing state to become unstable and for enabling a continual skipping state.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations31
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicFluid Dynamics Simulations and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207