Turbulent Entrainment Into Volcanic Plumes: New Constraints From Laboratory Experiments on Buoyant Jets Rising in a Stratified Crossflow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Predictions for the heights and downwind trajectories of volcanic plumes using integral models are critical for the assessment of risks and climate impacts of explosive eruptions but are strongly influenced by parameterizations for turbulent entrainment. We compare four popular parameterizations using small scale laboratory experiments spanning the large range of dynamical regimes in which volcanic eruptions occur. We reduce uncertainties on the wind entrainment coefficient β which quantifies the contribution of wind‐driven radial velocity shear to entrainment and is a major source of uncertainty for predicting plume height. We show that models better predict plume trajectories if (i) β is constant or increases with the plume buoyancy to momentum flux ratio and (ii) the superposition of the axial and radial velocity shear contributions to the turbulent entrainment is quadratic rather than linear. Our results have important implications for predicting the heights and likelihood of collapse of volcanic columns.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".