Waves Run-Up and Overtopping Simulations Using Lagrangian Blocks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wave run-up and overtopping of coastal structures are simulated using Lagrangian Blocks on Eulerian Mesh (LBEM). In the LBEM simulations, the blocks carry the mass and momentum. The movement of the blocks is calculated in a Lagrangian reference frame. The water depth defined by the volume blocks is non-negative. The wave fronts across the wet-and-dry interface are simulated by the block method without interruption by the oscillation problem that has limited the applicability of many existing computational methods. To evaluate the accuracy of the LBEM method in this paper, simulations are carried out for (i) the dam-break waves, (ii) the wave run-up on plane beach, and (iii) the overtopping of solitary waves over levee. The simulations of the dam-break wave have produced excellent agreement with the exact solutions by Ritter [1] and Stoker [2], and the semi-analytical solution by Sakkas and Strelkoff [3,4]. The simulations of the wave run-up on plane beach agree with the experimental data and the nonlinear theory of Synolakis [5]. The simulations of wave overtopping trapezoidal dike agree with the finite-volume simulations of Stansby [6]. The results have demonstrated the accuracy of the LBEM method and the versatility of the method for general wave simulations over variable terrain.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".