MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058621541 · doi:10.1029/2000jc900165

Shear instability in the St. Lawrence Estuary, Canada: A comparison of fine‐scale observations and estuarine circulation model results

2001· article· en· W2058621541 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Bourgault, François J. Saucier, Charles A. Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuoyancyInstabilityGeologyPycnoclineEstuaryAmplitudeWavelengthRichardson numberEstuarine water circulationMechanicsAtmospheric sciencesGeophysicsMeteorologyPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A three‐dimensional numerical model was used to predict the timing and the location of shear instabilities in the St. Lawrence Estuary. This model suggests that significant mixing occur during flood tides in the upper estuary. This mixing is associated with a strong bottom density current made of the cold Gulf of St. Lawrence intermediate waters flowing under the St. Lawrence mixed surface waters. Guided by these results, a field experiment was undertaken in summer 1997 to verify this and to document the conditions that favor the development of instabilities. The instabilities were found as predicted and documented from acoustic imaging, current profiler, and density measurements. The instabilities first develop in the form of wavelike disturbances before they break, like Kelvin‐Helmholtz instabilities. The unstable waves have wavelength of ≈140–150 m and extend vertically between 10 and 25 m. The fine‐scale observations of the semidiurnal evolution of the vertical structure of currents and density at the experimental site are compared with the numerical results. The model reproduces accurately the tidal variability of the currents but underestimates by a factor of 2 the amplitude of the density fluctuations. The general patterns of the shear squared S2 and the buoyancy frequency squared N2 are reasonably well reproduced by the model, but their intensities are ≈2 times smaller than the observations. This difference is attributed to the limited vertical resolution of the model at the pycnocline. However, the modeled Richardson numbers, Ri ≡ N2S−2, are reasonably well reproduced and appeared to be useful for the prediction of instabilities in such a complex environment.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.068
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 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

Citations16
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207