MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117675459 · doi:10.1175/jpo3031.1

Storm-Induced Circulation in Lunenburg Bay of Nova Scotia: Observations and Numerical Simulations

2007· article· en· W2117675459 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Liang Wang, Jinyu Sheng, Alex E. Hay, Douglas J. Schillinger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Oceanography · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones Research
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
KeywordsBayStorm surgeNova scotiaBarotropic fluidStormClimatologyOceanographyGeologyStorm trackTropical cycloneWind stressEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyAtmospheric sciencesGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An extreme weather event (Hurricane Juan) made landfall in Nova Scotia, Canada, in September 2003. The storm produced an ∼70-cm storm surge and ∼40 cm s−1 coastal currents in Lunenburg Bay, registered by a coastal observing system. A fine-resolution (60 m) coastal circulation model is used to examine the response of Lunenburg Bay to Hurricane Juan. The model is forced by local wind stress at the sea surface, and tides and remotely generated waves specified at model open boundaries. The model performance is assessed in terms of γ2, the variance of the model errors normalized by the observed variance. The model reproduces very well the observed surface elevations with γ2 values of less than 0.05, and reasonably well the observed currents with γ2 values between 0.2 and 1.1 in the bay during Hurricane Juan. The model–data comparisons demonstrate that the coastal circulation in the bay is significantly affected by local wind associated with the storm. The model results are also used to demonstrate the importance of nonlinear dynamics in the barotropic response of the bay to the storm.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations19
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical OceanographySame topicTropical and Extratropical Cyclones ResearchFrench-language works237,207