How useful are progressive vector diagrams for studying coastal ocean transport?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Progressive vector diagrams (PVDs) have been used to estimate transport in the coastal ocean from point measurements of velocity time series, although they strictly only approximate true particle trajectories in regions where the currents are spatially uniform. Currents in most coastal regions vary significantly in both space and time, making coastal transport estimates from PVDs questionable. Here, we used synoptic surface currents measured over periods of several months by HF radars in two coastal areas with distinctly different circulation features (the Gulf of Eilat, a deep, semi‐enclosed basin, and the Delaware Bay mouth, a coastal estuarine outflow) to assess the time scales over which PVD paths computed from velocity time series at fixed points separate from particle trajectories computed from two‐dimensional measured horizontal currents that vary in both space and time. In both study regions, PVDs and particle trajectories separate by 1 km over a mean time period of 7–10 h with no significant month‐to‐month variation in either region. The separation time statistics presented here should serve as a strong caution for investigators motivated to estimate transport using only point measurements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".