Dynamical analysis of sea-breeze hodograph rotation in Sardinia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. This study investigates the diurnal evolution of sea-breeze (SB) rotation over an island at the middle latitudes. Earlier research on sea breezes in Sardinia shows that the onshore winds around various coasts of the island exhibit both the theoretically predicted clockwise rotation as well as seemingly anomalous anticlockwise rotation. A non-hydrostatic fully compressible numerical model (WRF) is used to simulate wind fields on and around the island on previously studied sea-breeze days, and is shown to capture the circulation on all coasts accurately. Diurnal rotation of wind is examined, and patterns of clockwise and anticlockwise rotation are identified. A dynamical analysis is performed by extracting individual forcing terms from the horizontal momentum equations. Analysis of several regions around the island shows that the direction of rotation is a result of a complex interaction between near-surface and synoptic pressure gradient, Coriolis and advection forcings. An idealized simulation is performed over an artificial island with dramatically simplified topography yet similar dimensions and latitude to Sardinia. Dynamical analysis of the idealized case reveals a rather different pattern of hodograph rotation to the real Sardinia, yet similar underlying dynamics. The research provides new insights into the dynamics underlying sea-breeze hodograph rotation, especially in coastal zones with a complex topography and/or coastline.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".