MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802223556 · doi:10.1029/2017jc012939

Simulation of Wave‐Current Interactions Under Hurricane Conditions Using an Unstructured‐Grid Model: Impacts on Ocean Waves

2018· article· en· W2802223556 on OpenAlexafffund
William Perrie, Bechara Toulany

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Oceans · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersOffice of Energy Research and DevelopmentMarine Environmental Observation Prediction and Response NetworkU.S. Department of Defense
KeywordsSignificant wave heightBuoyExtratropical cycloneWind waveWave heightWind wave modelMeteorologyWave modelDrag coefficientGeologyStormBreaking waveClimatologyEnvironmental scienceAtmospheric sciencesWave propagationDragPhysicsMechanicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The effect of wave‐current interactions on ocean waves under hurricane conditions is investigated through application of the unstructured‐grid finite‐volume community ocean model (FVCOM) coupled to the unstructured‐grid surface wave model (SWAVE) in the North Atlantic Ocean. We study wave‐current interactions during the life cycles of extratropical hurricanes Juan (2003) and Bill (2009) as they propagate from subtropical waters to midlatitudes in the Northwest Atlantic. Simulations of wave parameters in each hurricane are shown to compare well with buoy and satellite altimeter observations, in terms of winds, significant wave heights, wave energy spectra, and wave directions. This is partially achieved by restricting the drag coefficient. It is well known that the maximum intensity of tropical cyclones depends on the ratio of the enthalpy coefficient to the drag coefficient. The latter increases with wind speed, levels off with category one hurricanes and may drop for even higher winds. In our study, we find that setting a limiting value on the drag coefficient improves the simulations of waves at peak storm intensities. Simulation of wave‐current interactions is also shown to improve the simulation of the wave heights and wave energy spectra. This is notable at the peak of the storms, in comparisons with observations from buoys in areas of both deep water and relatively shallow water. The effect of currents on significant wave heights is shown to reach 0.4 m for hurricane Juan and 1.0 m for hurricane Bill, or as much as about ±10% for wave heights distributed along the storm track.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.402
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations43
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research OceansSame topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207