MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087739842 · doi:10.1063/1.3211274

Ekman destabilization of inertially stable baroclinic abyssal flow on a sloping bottom

2009· article· en· W2087739842 on OpenAlexafffund
Gordon E. Swaters

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBaroclinityInviscid flowPhysicsMechanicsEkman transportBarotropic fluidInertial waveAbyssal zoneGeologyGeophysicsClassical mechanicsOceanographyWave propagation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Baroclinic abyssal currents on a sloping bottom, which are nonlinearly stable in the sense of Liapunov in the absence of dissipation, are shown to be destabilized by the presence of a bottom Ekman boundary layer for any positive value of the Ekman number. When the abyssal flow is baroclinically unstable, the dissipation acts to reduce the inviscid growth rates except near the marginal stability boundary where it acts to increase the inviscid growth rates. It is shown that when the abyssal flow is baroclinically stable, the Ekman destabilization corresponds to the kinematic wave phase velocity lying outside the range of the inertial topographic Rossby phase velocities. The transition mechanism described here might provide a dynamical bridge between the nonrotational roll-wave instability that can occur in supercritical abyssal overflows and frictionally induced destabilization in subinertial geostrophically balanced baroclinic abyssal currents. In addition, the theory presented here suggests a dissipation-induced destabilization mechanism for coastal downwelling fronts whose cross-slope potential vorticity gradient does not satisfy the necessary condition for baroclinic instability.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.377

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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