Interfacial waves in two-layer exchange flows downslope of a bottom sill
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experimental study was conducted to examine the interfacial waves in two-layer exchange flows downslope of a bottom sill. The objective of the study was to understand the generation mechanisms of different interfacial waves and the generation conditions and development of Kelvin–Helmholtz (KH) instabilities in spatially varying flow field. During the flow regime of the steady maximal exchange, low-frequency oscillation of the density interface above the sill crest was observed, which resulted in periodic piling and releasing of the lower-layer fluid. This low-frequency oscillation led to the development of large-scale downslope waves that caused significant interfacial entrainment. The periodic time of those piling and releasing events was found to be inversely proportional to the square root of the reduced gravitational acceleration and to be related to the baroclinic forcing of the basin internal seiching. During late sub-maximal exchange, regular and frequent KH instabilities were generated at the interface down the slope at bulk Richardson number of approximately 0.07–0.21, which is considerably larger than previous theoretical predictions for parallel flows with a sharp density interface. Two different growth patterns of those KH instabilities were observed. Measurements of their initial growth rate and the wavelength were also obtained and compared to the theoretical predictions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".