Instability in Stratified Shear Flow: Review of a Physical Interpretation Based on Interacting Waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Instability in homogeneous and density stratified shear flows may be interpreted in terms of the interaction of two (or more) otherwise free waves in the velocity and density profiles. These waves exist on gradients of vorticity and density, and instability results when two fundamental conditions are satisfied: (I) the phase speeds of the waves are stationary with respect to each other (“phase-locking“), and (II) the relative phase of the waves is such that a mutual growth occurs. The advantage of the wave interaction approach is that it provides a physical interpretation to shear flow instability. This paper is largely intended to purvey the basics of this physical interpretation to the reader, while both reviewing and consolidating previous work on the topic. The interpretation is shown to provide a framework for understanding many classical and nonintuitive results from the stability of stratified shear flows, such as the Rayleigh and Fjørtoft theorems, and the destabilizing effect of an otherwise stable density stratification. Finally, we describe an application of the theory to a geophysical-scale flow in the Fraser River estuary.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".