Observations of turbulent kinetic energy dissipation at the Labrador Sea surface layer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present an analysis of turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rates in the upper ocean using in situ measurements collected by a coherent Doppler sonar in the Labrador Sea during summer 2004. The sonar recorded horizontal velocity fluctuations of the upper 2 m with an uncommonly small spatial resolution of 0.8 cm, allowing direct calculations of wavenumber spectra and the application of Kolmogorov theory to obtain turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rates for the first time in this area. The project presented a unique opportunity for the study of air–sea exchange during a phytoplankton bloom, being the first time a specialized air–sea interaction spar buoy was deployed during such particular event. An additional uniqueness of this experiment resulted from being the first turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rate observations obtained at higher latitudes, coincidentally in a well-known region of dense water formation, with a fundamental role in both global circulation and forecasting studies of global climate change. Focusing on the relationship between turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rates and wave phase in the upper 2 m, we estimated O[Formula: see text] turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rates, consistent with previous estimates obtained through similar devices and methods. A T-test between dissipation rates calculated at the crest and at the trough of waves showed no dependency of turbulent kinetic energy dissipation rates on the wave phase at 2 m depth, coinciding with many of the earlier findings available. a comparison with previous research showing conflicting results with our values is also discussed here linking them to the relative roles of experimental design variations, diverse dynamical frames, and particular environmental conditions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".