Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution and breaking of internal solitary waves in a shallow upper layer as they approach a constant bottom slope is examined through laboratory experiments. The waves are launched in a two‐layer fluid through the standard lock‐release method. In most experiments, the wave amplitude is significantly larger than the depth of the shallow upper layer so that they are not well described by Korteweg‐de Vries theory. The dynamics of the shoaling waves are characterized by the Iribarren number, Ir, which measures the ratio of the topographic slope to the square root of the characteristic wave slope. This is used to classify breaking regimes as collapsing, plunging, surging, and nonbreaking for increasing values of Ir. For breaking waves, the maximum interface descent, , is predicted to depend upon the topographic slope, s , and the incident wave's amplitude and width, A sw and L sw , respectively, as . This prediction is corroborated by our experiments. Likewise, we apply simple heuristics to estimate the speed of interface descent, and we characterize the speed and range of the consequent upslope flow of the lower layer after breaking has occurred.
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".