MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184647969 · doi:10.3390/rs13132603

Spreading of Lagrangian Particles in the Black Sea: A Comparison between Drifters and a High-Resolution Ocean Model

2021· article· en· W3184647969 on OpenAlexaff
Maher Bouzaiene, Milena Menna, Dalila Elhmaïdi, Ahmad Fehmi Dilmahamod, Pierre‐Marie Poulain

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOceanographic and Atmospheric Processes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDispersion (optics)PhysicsSea-surface heightGeologyClimatologyMeteorologyAltimeter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Lagrangian dispersion statistics of the Black Sea are estimated using satellite-tracked drifters, satellite altimeter data and a high-resolution ocean model. Comparison between the in-situ measurements and the model reveals good agreement in terms of the surface dispersion. The mean sub-basin coherent structures and currents of the Black Sea are well reproduced by the model. Seasonal variability of the dispersion in the upper (15 m), intermediate (150 m) and deep (750 m) layers are discussed with a special focus of the role of sub-basin scale structures and currents on the turbulent dispersion regimes. In terms of the surface relative dispersion, the results show the presence of the three known turbulent exponential, Richardson and diffusive-like regimes. The non-local exponential regime is only detected by the model for scales <10 km, while the local Richardson regime occurs between 10 and 100 km in all cases due to the presence of an inverse energy cascade range, and the diffusive-like regime is well detected for the largest distance by drifters (100–300 km) in winter/spring. Regarding the surface absolute dispersion, it reflects the occurrence of both quasi-ballistic and random-walk regimes at small and large times, respectively, while the two anomalous hyperbolic (5/4) and elliptic (5/3) regimes, which are related to the topology of the Black Sea, are detected at intermediate times. At depth, the signatures of the relative and absolute dispersion regimes shown in the surface layer are still valid in most cases. The absolute dispersion is anisotropic; the zonal component grows faster than the meridional component in any scenario.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.120

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicOceanographic and Atmospheric ProcessesFrench-language works237,207