Properties of Rossby Waves in the North Atlantic Estimated from Satellite Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study uses satellite observations of sea surface height (SSH) to detect westward-propagating anomalies, presumably baroclinic Rossby waves, in the North Atlantic and to estimate their period, wavelength, amplitude, and phase speed. Detection involved a nonlinear fit of the theoretical dispersion relation for Rossby waves to the time–longitude spectrum at a given latitude. Estimates of period, wavelength, and phase speed resulted directly from the detection process. Based on these, a filter was designed and applied to extract the Rossby wave signal from the data. This allowed a mapping of the spatial variability of the Rossby wave amplitude for the North Atlantic. Results showed the familiar larger speed of observed Rossby waves relative to that expected from theory, with the largest differences occurring at shorter periods. The data also show that the dominant Rossby waves, those with periods that are less than annual, propagated with almost uniform speed in the western part of the North Atlantic between 30° and 40°N. In agreement with previous studies, the amplitude of the Rossby wave field was higher in the western part of the North Atlantic than in the eastern part. This is often attributed to the influence of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge. By contrast, this study, through an analysis of the wave spatial structure, suggests that the source of the baroclinic Rossby waves at midlatitudes in the western North Atlantic is located southeast of the Grand Banks where the Gulf Stream and the deep western boundary current interact with the Newfoundland Ridge. The spatial structure of the waves in the eastern North Atlantic is consistent with the formation of these waves along the basin's eastern boundary.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".