Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strong tidal currents in the Fraser Estuary, BC, Canada, cause intense flow-topography interaction around islands and over shallow sills. At Boundary Pass, a steep sill forms a pronounced barrier for flow of dense water from the Pacific Ocean into the Strait of Georgia. The processes at the sill control the renewal of deep and intermediate water in the Strait. The strong flood tidal flow forces dense water to flow over the sill. It then meets a fresh surface layer just downstream of the sill crest and subducts underneath the fresh water, setting up a hydraulic sill flow with an arrested upper layer. Vertical current speeds at the downstream side of the sill reach up to 0.75 m s−1, and intense detrainment of dense water from the lower into the upper layer causes a volume loss of 60% over a distance of 200 m. Surface waves travelling into the convergence zone (tidal front) over the sill crest tend to steepen and break due to wave-current interaction. The breaking waves inject gas bubbles, which either rise back to the sea surface or dissolve completely, depending on their rise speed and the strength of the vertical currents. Bubbles injected close to the plunge point of the dense water mass are drawn down by the extreme currents to depths of up to 160 m, enhancing air-sea gas exchange. The hydraulic flow, wave-current interaction, and gas bubble behaviour are described with simple models. They are used to interpret extensive ship-board measurements during two cruises in the Fraser estuary and help in the understanding of the physical processes involved in air-sea gas exchange in tidal fronts. The oxygen flux in the tidal front at Boundary Pass is compared with other oxygen sources in the Fraser Estuary and shows that tidal fronts may contribute significantly to the aeration of an estuary. The described processes may be also applicable to other coastal areas with strong tidal currents like Norway, Chile, or Japan, and may be important in convergence zones like deep convection regimes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".