MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3102858479 · doi:10.1175/jpo-d-20-0073.1

Surface and Interfacial Waves in a Strongly Stratified Upper Ocean

2020· article· en· W3102858479 on OpenAlexafffund
Johannes Gemmrich, Adam H. Monahan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Oceanography · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersWestern Canada Research GridCompute CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMarine Environmental Observation Prediction and Response Network
KeywordsDissipationWavenumberBreaking waveInternal wavePhysicsSurface waveStratification (seeds)MechanicsWave propagationComputational physicsOpticsThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In an idealized two-layer fluid, surface waves can generate waves at the internal interface through class-3 resonant triads in which all waves are propagating in the same direction. The triads are restricted to wavenumbers above a critical value k crit that depends on the density ratio R between the two layers and their depths. We perform numerical simulations to analyze the evolution of a surface wave field, initially specified by a Pierson–Moskowitz-type spectrum, for R = 0.97 (representing a realistic lower a bound for oceanic stratification). At high initial steepness and peak wavenumber k p ≪ k crit , the energy increases in the spectral tail; as a parameterization of resulting wave breaking, at each time step individual waves with a steepness greater than the limiting Stokes steepness are removed. The energy change of the surface wave field is a combination of energy transfer to the interfacial waves, spectral downshift, and wave breaking dissipation. At wavenumbers there is a net loss of energy, with the greatest dissipation at ≈1.3 k p . The maximum gain occurs at ≈0.5 k p . The onset of the spectral change shows a strong threshold behavior with respect to the initial wave steepness. For steep initial waves the integrated energy dissipation can reach >30% of the initial energy, and only ≈1% of the initial surface wave energy is transferred to the interfacial wave field. The spectral change could be expressed as an additional dissipation source term, and coupled ocean–wave models should include additional mixing associated with the interfacial waves and enhanced wave breaking turbulence.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.208
Threshold uncertainty score0.394

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical OceanographySame topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207