MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060516029 · doi:10.1111/1467-9590.00166

On the Number of Conserved Quantities for the Two‐Layer Shallow‐Water Equations

2001· article· en· W2060516029 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Applied Mathematics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicNavier-Stokes equation solutions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsConservation lawInviscid flowShallow water equationsMathematicsConserved quantityFlow (mathematics)Mathematical analysisMultinomial distributionForcing (mathematics)Finite setFinite differencePhysicsClassical mechanicsGeometryMathematical physicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The shallow‐water equations for two‐layer inviscid flow with a free surface overlying a rigid horizontal bottom subject to gravitational forcing only are examined to determine the possible forms of conservation laws that the equations permit. In the case of a single layer with flow in only one horizontal direction, it is known that there are an infinite number of associated equations in conservation form, where the conserved quantity is a multinomial in the layer variables. The method used to determine this result is generalized to show that in the two‐layer case, the result does not generalize, and it is discovered that only a finite number of conservation equations exist when the density difference between the layers is nonzero. The subsequent conservation equations are given explicitly, and a systematic method for deriving conservation laws from an arbitrary first‐order system is described. For the case when the flow is in both horizontal dimensions, the method of analysis is straightforward in the one‐layer case, and the finite number of conservation equations are derived. The two‐layer case is similar, and the finite number of generalized conserved quantities are stated, although the question of whether or not there are only a finite number is posed as an open question.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.314
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.123 · 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