On vorticity waves propagating in a waveguide formed by two critical layers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A theoretical model for long vorticity waves propagating on a background shear flow is developed. The basic flow is assumed to be confined between two critical layers, respectively, located near the lower and upper rigid boundaries. In these critical layers even small disturbances will break, and eventually a thin zone of mixed fluid will appear. We derive a nonlinear evolution equation for the amplitude of a wave-like disturbance in this configuration, based on the assumption that the critical layers are replaced by thin recirculation zones attached to the lower and upper rigid boundaries, where the flow is very weak. The dispersive and time-evolution terms in this equation are typical for Korteweg–de Vries theory, but the nonlinear term is more complicated. It comprises nonlinearity associated with the shear across the waveguide, and the nonlinearity due to the flow over the recirculation zones. The coefficient of the quadratic nonlinear term may change sign, depending on the presence or otherwise of recirculation zones at the upper or lower boundary of the waveguide. We then seek steady travelling wave solutions, and show that there are no such steady solutions if the waveguide contains no density stratification. However, steady solutions including solitary waves and bores can exist if the fluid between the critical layers is weakly density stratified.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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".