MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2346742516 · doi:10.1175/jpo-d-15-0219.1

Stationary Sea Surface Height Anomalies in Cyclonic Boundary Currents: Conservation of Potential Vorticity and Deviations from Strict Topographic Steering

2016· article· en· W2346742516 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sara Broomé, Johan Nilsson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Oceanography · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyBoundary currentPotential vorticityBuoyancyGeostrophic windVorticityCurrent meterGeostrophic currentHydrographyOcean currentRossby numberOcean surface topographyGeophysicsCurrent (fluid)Continental shelfOceanographyGeodesyVortexMechanicsPhysicsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In high-latitude subpolar seas, such as the Nordic seas and the Labrador Sea, time-mean geostrophic currents mediate the bulk of the meridional oceanic heat transport. These currents are primarily encountered along the continental slopes as intense cyclonic boundary currents, which, because of the relatively weak stratification, should be strongly steered by the bottom topography. However, analyses of hydrographic and satellite altimetric data along depth contours in Nordic seas boundary currents reveal some remarkable, stationary, along-stream variations in the depth-integrated buoyancy and bottom pressure. A closer examination shows that these variations are linked to changes in steepness and curvature of the continental slope. To examine the underlying dynamics, a steady-state model of a cyclonic stratified boundary current over a topographic slope is developed in the limit of small Rossby numbers. Based on potential vorticity conservation, equations for the zeroth- and first-order pressure and buoyancy fields are derived. To the lowest order, the flow is completely aligned with the bottom topography. However, the first-order results show that where the lowest-order flow increases (decreases) its relative vorticity along a depth contour, the first-order pressure and depth-integrated buoyancy increase (decrease). This response is associated with cross-isobath flows, which induce stretching/compression of fluid elements that compensates for the changes in relative vorticity. The model-predicted along-isobath variations in pressure and depth-integrated buoyancy are comparable in magnitude to the ones found in the observational data from the Nordics Seas.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.410

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical OceanographySame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207