Numerical models of the exchange flows between Hamilton Harbour and Lake Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate simulations of the flow and the transport of water quality constituents in such coastal zones of large lakes as the western end of Lake Ontario and Hamilton Harbour are needed to assess the impact on pollutant levels of cleanup operations and sewage diversions. Coastal models in temperate zone lakes are classified in terms of density stratification, uniform in winter and stratified during summer. During the winter period a 1-D model of the flow between a lake and adjacent harbour is shown to agree favourably with advanced acoustic measurements of the flow in the connecting passage, but does not account for the observed winter buildup of salinity in the harbour. A calibrated 2-D hydrodynamic and salt transport model is used to show that significant exchange does not take place unless the excursion of the inflow is several times greater than the length of the connecting channel, an infrequent occurrence. The exchange is also shown to depend on the flow field at the entrances of the channel. In summer a 1-D vertical model illustrates the dramatic effect of the inflow from Lake Ontario on hypolimnetic temperatures of the harbour. Three-dimensional hydrodynamic and temperaturesalt transport models are validated by extensive field observations taken in 1996. The stratified exchange is much stronger than its winter counterpart and more steady. Winter exchange is forced by short-term water level fluctuations, whereas summer or stratified exchange by slowly fluctuating density contrasts between the two water bodies.Key words: exchange flows, hydrodynamic and transport modelling, lakes, harbours, water quality.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".