MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2515850627 · doi:10.2112/si75-181.1

Three-Dimensional Numerical Simulation of Nonlinear Internal Waves in the St. Lawrence Estuary, Canada

2016· article· en· W2515850627 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Van Thinh Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Coastal Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCoastal and Marine Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSeoul National University
KeywordsEstuaryOceanographyGeologyNonlinear systemForcing (mathematics)Computer simulationPhysicsClimatologyMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nguyen, V. T., 2016. Three-Dimensional Numerical Simulation of Nonlinear Internal Waves in the St. Lawrence Estuary, Canada. In: Vila-Concejo, A.; Bruce, E.; Kennedy, D.M., and McCarroll, R.J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Coastal Symposium (Sydney, Australia). Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue, No. 75, pp. 902–906. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208.The existence of nonlinear internal waves (NIWs) running up a sloping boundary of the Ile-aux-Lievres Island in the St. Lawrence Estuary, Canada has been revealed by the researchers at Memorial and Dalhousie Universities of Canada. Unfortunately, there is no direct field observation of the generation of the NIWs in this region in order to determine where these waves be generated and emanated from. In this paper, a nonhydrostatic three-dimensional model, MITgcm model, is modified and applied to investigate the generation and propagation of NIWs by tidal forcing over an idealized depression simplified from the topography of the North Channel in the St. Lawrence Estuary. A comparison between the numerical results and the observations shows very good qualitative agreements. The results of the simulation is not only to explain above phenomenon, but also to show the mechanism of the NIWs in this region.

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)0.001
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 score0.559
Threshold uncertainty score0.669

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Coastal ResearchSame topicCoastal and Marine DynamicsFrench-language works237,207