MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Simple Model for Random Wave Bottom Friction and Dissipation

2004· article· en· W2177641318 on OpenAlexaff
Qingping Zou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Oceanography · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDissipationSpectral linePhysicsSurface waveSpectral densityWavenumberBoundary layerMechanicsMathematical analysisComputational physicsMathematicsOpticsQuantum mechanicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on the spectral eddy viscosity model of bottom boundary layers, the spectral representation of bottom friction and dissipation for irregular waves is reduced to an equivalent monochromatic wave representation. The representative wave amplitude and frequency are chosen so that the bottom velocity and bottom shear stress variances of the equivalent wave model are identical to those of the spectral model. Moreover, these variances have to satisfy the same relationship as those of a monochromatic wave with the same frequency. According to the wave bottom boundary layer theory, the ratio between bottom stress spectrum and bottom velocity spectrum has a frequency dependence of ωq, where the exponent q is a positive constant. The representative wave frequency and direction are obtained based on this power law, whereas in previous studies they were derived using a Taylor expansion of the ratio about a particular frequency or were proposed heuristically. Previous equivalent wave theories are therefore valid only for narrowbanded wave spectra. The present theory, however, is applicable to a wide variety of wave spectra including broadbanded and multimodal spectra.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0030.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical OceanographySame topicCoastal and Marine DynamicsFrench-language works237,207