MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Internal Solitary Waves with shear: beyond DJL theory

2020· article· en· W3100401270 on OpenAlexaff
Marek Stastna, Aaron Coutino, Ryan Walter

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInternal waveInstabilityPhysicsAmplitudeShear (geology)MechanicsTrainClassical mechanicsGeologyQuantum mechanicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While background shear is ubiquitous in the natural environment, the vast majority of theoretical and numerical studies of internal solitary waves do not include a background shear. Walter et al 2016, Continental Shelf Research reported on measurements in Monterey Bay in which large amplitude internal solitary wave trains were observed but corresponding waves could not be computed from DJL theory due to the strength of the background shear. In this talk I will revisit this issue using a classical stratified adjustment set up. For the case of an exponential, surface trapped background current I will demonstrate that internal solitary wave trains with and without trapped cores coexist with a substantial region dominated by stratified shear instability and/or Rayleigh Taylor instability. I will then demonstrate the type of internal wave train that results in cases when the the variational formulation of the DJL equation fails to converge. I will speculate on implications for theoretical description of such waves and for more realistic simulations in the coastal ocean.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes→French-language works237,207→