Western Boundary Sea Level: A Theory, Rule of Thumb, and Application to Climate Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To better understand coastal sea level variability and changes, a theory that predicts sea levels along a curved western boundary using interior ocean sea level information is proposed. The western boundary sea level at a particular latitude is expressed by the sum of contributions from interior sea levels propagating onto the western boundary by long Rossby waves between that latitude and a higher latitude, and from the western boundary sea level at the higher latitude. This theory is examined by using a linear, reduced gravity model. A comparison between the theory and the model shows good agreement. A simple scaling law (or rule of thumb) derived from the theory provides a measure of the higher-latitude sea level and ocean interior sea level contributions. The theory is then tested using data from 34 climate models in phase 5 of the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP5) for dynamic sea level changes between the end of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries. The theory captures the nearly uniform sea level rise from the Labrador Sea to New York City (NYC), with a reduction in the increase of sea level farther south toward the equator, qualitatively consistent with the CMIP5 multimodel ensemble, even though the theory underestimates the equatorward reduction rate. Along the South American east coast, the theory successfully reproduced the spatial pattern of the sea level change. The theory suggests a strong link between a sea level rise hot spot along the northeastern coast of North America and the sea level increase in the Labrador Sea, consistent with the result that rates of NYC sea level rise are highly correlated to those in the Labrador Sea in CMIP5 models.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".