Field evidence of pressure gradient induced incipient motion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently, models for the onshore migration of nearshore sandbars were improved by including an empirical acceleration term in the sediment transport formulation (Hoefel and Elgar, 2003). Here, field observations of the fluid‐sediment interface suggest that the success of this empirical parameter may result from unsteady forcing of sediment beds by nearshore waves. The velocity and sediment observations show that, under large pressure gradients present during the strengthening of onshore‐directed flow, several centimeters of previously still sediment can be mobilized and transported onshore. The onshore‐directed mobile‐bed layer rapidly settles as the wave velocity weakens. These observations are inconsistent with traditional sediment transport theories (Shields, 1936; Bagnold, 1966) that assume incipient motion is solely based on the force applied by bed stress but are consistent with theories that include an additional force induced by the horizontal pressure gradient (Madsen, 1974; Sleath, 1999). In this paper, we provide the first field evidence of incipient motion that is significantly influenced by the unsteady forcing introduced by the horizontal pressure gradient due to surface gravity waves.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".