MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735502967 · doi:10.1134/s0001437017020138

Tidal oscillations in the Caspian Sea

2017· article· en· W2735502967 on OpenAlexaff
Igor Medvedev, E. A. Kulikov, Alexander B. Rabinovich

Bibliographic record

VenueOceanology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and environmental studies
Canadian institutionsNorth Pacific Marine Science Organization
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStructural basinGeologyTide gaugeAmplitudeOceanographyTidal rangeSpectral analysisSea levelClimatologyEstuaryGeomorphologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Long-term hourly data from 12 tide gauge stations were used to examine the character of tidal oscillations in the Caspian Sea. Diurnal and semidiurnal tidal peaks are well-defined in sea level spectra in the Middle and South Caspian basins. High-resolution spectral analysis revealed that the diurnal sea level oscillations in the Middle Caspian Basin have a gravitational origin, while those in the South Caspian Basin are mainly caused by radiational effects: the amplitude of diurnal radiational harmonic S 1 is much higher than those of gravitational harmonics О 1 , P 1 , and K 1 . In the North Caspian Basin, there are no gravitational tides and only weak radiational tides are observed. A semidiurnal type of tide is predominant in the Middle and South Caspian basins. Harmonic analysis of the tides for individual annual series with subsequent vector averaging over the entire observational period was applied to estimate the mean amplitudes and phases of major tidal constituents. The amplitude of the M 2 harmonic reaches 5.4 cm in the South Caspian Basin (at Aladga). A maximum tidal range of 21 cm was found at the Aladga station in the southeastern part of the Caspian Sea, whereas the tidal range in the western part of the South Caspian Basin varies from 5 to 10 cm.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 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

Citations29
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOceanologySame topicMarine and environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207