Generation and Propagation of Near-Inertial Waves in a Baroclinic Current on the Tasmanian Shelf
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Near-inertial waves (NIWs) are often an energetic component of the internal wave field on windy continental shelves. The effect of baroclinic geostrophic currents, which introduce both relative vorticity and baroclinicity, on NIWs is not well understood. Relative vorticity affects the resonant frequency f eff , while both relative vorticity and baroclinicity modify the minimum wave frequency of freely propagating waves ω min . On a windy and narrow shelf, we observed wind-forced oscillations that generated NIWs where f eff was less than the Coriolis frequency f . If everywhere f eff > f then NIWs were generated where ω min < f and f eff was smallest. The background current not only affected the location of generation, but also the NIWs’ propagation direction. The estimated NIW energy fluxes show that NIWs propagated predominantly toward the equator because ω min > f on the continental slope for the entire sample period. In addition to being laterally trapped on the shelf, we observed vertically trapped and intensified NIWs that had a frequency ω within the anomalously low-frequency band (i.e., ω min < ω < f eff ), which only exists if the baroclinicity is nonzero. We observed two periods when ω min < f on the shelf, but the relative vorticity was positive (i.e., f eff > f ) for one of these periods. The process of NIW propagation remained consistent with the local ω min , and not f eff , emphasizing the importance of baroclinicity on the NIW dynamics. We conclude that windy shelves with baroclinic background currents are likely to have energetic NIWs, but the current and seabed will adjust the spatial distribution and energetics of these NIWs.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".