Interaction of Fully-Nonlinear Internal Solitary Waves of Opposite Polarity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have suggested that fully nonlinear internal solitary waves (ISWs) are very soliton-like as the interaction of two ISWs results in only very small changes in amplitude of the interacting ISWs and in the production of a very small amplitude wave train. Previous studies have, however, considered ISWs with the polarity predicted by the sign of the quadratic nonlinear coefficient of the KdV equation. The Gardner equation, which is an extension of the KdV equation that includes a cubic nonlinear term, has ISWs of two polarities (i.e., waves of depression and elevation) when the cubic coefficient of the Gardner equation is positive. These waves are soliton solutions of the Gardner equations. In this talk I will discuss the interaction of ISWs of opposite polarity in continuous asymmetric three layer stratifications. Regions in parameter space where ISWs of opposite polarity exist will be discussed and I will demonstrate via fully nonlinear numerical simulations that the interaction of ISWs of opposite polarity waves are far from soliton-like: their interaction can result in very large changes in wave amplitude and may produce a very complicated wave field with multiple large ISWs, a large linear wave field and breather-like waves.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".