Coastal windstorms create unsteady, unpredictable storm surges in a fluvial Maine estuary
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Storm surges create coastal flooding that can be damaging to life and property. In estuaries with significant river influence (fluvial), it is possible for tides, storm surge, and river discharge to interact and enhance surges relative to the immediate coast. These tide-surge-river interactions were previously identified in a fluvial Maine estuary as higher frequency (>four cycles per day) oscillations to storm surge which were proposed to be incited by enhanced friction and resonance during certain windstorm events (Spicer et al. 2019). The relative contributions to tide-surge-river interaction from atmospheric forcing variables (wind, barometric pressure, and externally generated surge) remains unclear. This work seeks to decompose and analyze a recent windstorm surge event to better isolate the effects of atmospheric forcing on tidesurge- river interaction. Results show total storm surges in the fluvial estuary to be two times larger than at the estuary mouth because of tide-surge-river interaction. Analysis indicated at least 50% of the magnitude of tide-surge-river interactions are created by non-tidal forcing, in the form of wind, enhancing frictional energy in the estuary. The remaining tide-surge-river interaction is likely a result of changes in tidal wave propagation speed due to surge deepening the mean estuary water level.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 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".