MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889164738 · doi:10.1029/2018jc014146

Exploration of Tidal‐Fluvial Interaction in the Columbia River Estuary Using S_TIDE

2018· article· en· W2889164738 on OpenAlexaff
Haidong Pan, Xianqing Lv, Yingying Wang, Pascal Matte, Haibo Chen, Guangzhen Jin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Oceans · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEstuaryBayTidal riverGeologyTide gaugeTidal ModelBathymetryFluvialCurrent (fluid)OceanographyOcean tideEnvironmental scienceSea levelGeomorphologyStructural basin

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Numerous tidal phenomena, including river tides, internal tides, and tides in ice‐covered bay, are nonstationary, which pose a great challenge for traditional tidal analysis methods. Based on the independent point scheme and cubic spline interpolation, a new approach, namely the enhanced harmonic analysis, is developed to deal with nonstationary tides. A MATLAB toolbox, S_TIDE, developed from the widely used T_TIDE, is used to realize the approach. The efficiency of S_TIDE is validated by analyzing a set of hourly water level observations from stations on the lower Columbia River. In all stations, the hindcast of S_TIDE is more accurate than NS_TIDE that is a powerful nonstationary tidal analysis tool adapted to river tides. The changing mean water level and tidal constituent properties obtained by S_TIDE are similar to those obtained by NS_TIDE, continuous wavelet transform, and empirical mode decomposition and highly consistent with theory on river tides. Moreover, different from NS_TIDE that only can be applied to river tides, enhanced harmonic analysis is free of dynamic content, assuming only known tidal frequencies. Therefore, S_TIDE can be applied to all kinds of nonstationary tides theoretically. Though powerful, S_TIDE also has some limitations: S_TIDE cannot be used for prediction and too many independent points in S_TIDE may induce computational memory overflow and unrealistic results.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.214

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 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

Citations138
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research OceansSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207