MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026612080 · doi:10.1063/1.3156007

Dipolar gyres generated by continuous forcing on a polar β-plane

2009· article· en· W2026612080 on OpenAlexafffund
Y. D. Afanasyev, Valérian Jewtoukoff

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhysicsDipoleGeophysical fluid dynamicsVortexMechanicsRotation (mathematics)Rossby numberRossby wavePolarClassical mechanicsGeometryTurbulenceAtmospheric sciences

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dipolar vortices generated by a force applied to an area of finite size are investigated in a rotating, polar β-plane fluid. The laboratory polar β-plane is dynamically equivalent to the polar regions of the ocean or the atmosphere where the Coriolis parameter varies quadratically with latitude. Both forced and unforced evolution of the flow is observed. The altimetric imaging velocimetry method is employed for imaging the rotating flows and measuring the velocity and surface elevation fields. The forced dipoles were observed to rotate in the anticyclonic direction from their initial orientation where the axis of the dipole is aligned with the direction of the force toward some steady state where the axis of the dipole is at an angle to the direction of the force. The theoretical prediction of the rotation angle is found to be in good agreement with the experimental results. Asymptotic solutions for limiting cases when forced dipoles are affected either by the Ekman-type bottom friction or by the γ-effect are found. The experiments also demonstrate that the unforced free dipoles rotate anticyclonically with almost steady rate and emit basin-scale Rossby waves.

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)0.000
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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.197
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

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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207