The baroclinic response to wind in a multiarm multibasin reservoir
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Field data, a three‐dimensional hydrodynamic numerical model, and modal decomposition were used to examine the baroclinic response to wind in two interconnected multiarm lakes, Knewstubb and Natalkuz Lakes (British Columbia, Canada). Similar to lakes of simpler geometry, the first‐vertical first‐horizontal mode (V1H1) of Knewstubb and Natalkuz Lakes was found to be the most energetic mode. This V1H1 dominance is attributed to similarity between the relatively uniform distributions of along‐thalweg wind and surface‐layer flow for the V1H1 mode. Two bathymetric features, the geometric constriction between Knewstubb and Natalkuz Lakes, and changes in thalweg orientation relative to the wind field act to create subbasins in which wind forcing causes local metalimnetic tilts. These subbasin scale tilts deepen the metalimnion at the downwind ends of the subbasins, raise the metalimnion at the upwind ends, and are superimposed on the lake‐wide V1H1 tilt. The metalimnetic tilts in the subbasins are attributed to higher horizontal modes that are equivalent to V1H1 modes of the subbasins. Because the thickness of the metalimnion is significant, the subbasin metalimnetic tilts occur with variations in the metalimnetic thickness along the subbasins; the metalimnion is compressed at the downwind end and expanded at the other end of each subbasin. This variability in thickness leads to metalimnetic intrusions following the relaxation of wind forcing. The findings of this study contribute to characterizing the baroclinic response to wind in lakes of complex bathymetry. In particular, this study helps in understanding the effect of bathymetric features on modal composition of the baroclinic response.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".