Variations in physiography, tidal forcing, and bottom shear stress in palaeo-seas: lessons learned from numerical modelling.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The physiography (geometry and bathymetry) of a basin and its latitude are the primary parameters that dictate the tidal dynamics in shoreline–shelf systems. Understanding the impact that changes in physiography have on tides allows researchers to 1) improve interpretations of historical sedimentary processes in shallow-marine basins, and 2) better predict potential variations in tidal dynamics in response to an anthropogenic-driven relative sea level change. Here, we present an analysis of numerical modelling of tidal propagation in the Upper Jurassic Sundance and Curtis Seas demontrating that basin-scale amplification and dampening of tides occurred in different palaeophysiographic configurations, and more localised amplification relating to tidal harmonics occurred in certain physiographic scenarios. Consequently, palaeophysiography was the primary control on both the magnitude and location of tidal amplification, flow speed, and bed shear stress, whereas secondary controls were initial tidal forcing and bottom drag coefficient. Simulation results for the palaeophysiography with a 600 m depth at the mouth of the system suggest a distribution of sedimentary facies comparable to those documented in the Upper Jurassic lower Curtis Formation, apart from the innermost Curtis Sea, near to the palaeoshoreline. Sediments potentially supplied by aeolian processes during regression and increased aridity were likely reworked by tides during a subsequent a transgression as the climate became more humid. The palaeophysiography with a 600 m depth at the mouth of the system can therefore be considered a realistic palaeophysiographic configuration for the Sundance and Curtis Seas given the similarities that exist between the predicted distribution of sedimentary facies and their actual distribution in the lower Curtis Formation. In this palaeophysiography, the Sundance Sea and the Curtis Sea would have thus attained a maximum depth of ~240 m and 40-45 m, respectively. In this context, the simulated tidal range in the Curtis Sea would have reached 2.60 m, which would classify the Curtis Sea as a meso-tidal system (2x 1.30 m tidal amplitude). Finally, using change in palaeophysiographic configuration as a proxy for relative sea-level variations revealed the non-uniqueness (sensu Burgess & Prince, 2015) of sedimentary successions deposited in tide-dominated basin, given that tidal amplification in the system was controlled by palaeophysiographic configuration: one specific succession could be the product of several, equally-valid relative sea-level histories. Reciprocally, the impact of relative sea-level change on different successions is non-unique, since local tidal harmonics and the characteristics of coeval deposition may vary significantly during relative sea level changes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".