Shoaling mode-2 internal solitary-like waves
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The propagation of a train of mode-2 internal solitary-like waves (ISWs) over a uniformly sloping, solid topographic boundary, has been studied by means of a combined laboratory and numerical investigation. The waves are generated by a lock-release method. Features of their shoaling include (i) formation of an oscillatory tail, (ii) degeneration of the wave form, (iii) wave run up, (iv) boundary layer separation, (v) vortex formation and re-suspension at the bed and (vi) a reflected wave signal. Slope steepness, $s$ , is defined to be the height of the slope divided by the slope base length. In shallow slope cases ( $s\leqslant 0.07$ ), the wave form is destroyed by the shoaling process; the leading mode-2 ISW degenerates into a train of mode-1 waves of elevation and little boundary layer activity is seen. For steeper slopes ( $s\geqslant 0.13$ ), boundary layer separation, vortex formation and re-suspension at the bed are observed. The boundary layer dynamics is shown (numerically) to be dependent on the Reynolds number of the flow. A reflected mode-2 wave signal and wave run up are seen for slopes of steepness $s\geqslant 0.20$ . The wave run up distance is shown to be proportional to the length scale $ac^{2}/g^{\prime }h_{2}\sin \unicode[STIX]{x1D703}$ where $a,c,g^{\prime },h_{2}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D703}$ are wave amplitude, wave speed, reduced gravity, pycnocline thickness and slope angle respectively.
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) | 0.002 | 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 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".