Bulk Transfer Coefficients Estimated From Eddy‐Covariance Measurements Over Lakes and Reservoirs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The drag coefficient, Stanton number and Dalton number are of particular importance for estimating the surface turbulent fluxes of momentum, heat and water vapor using bulk parameterization. Although these bulk transfer coefficients have been extensively studied over the past several decades in marine and large‐lake environments, there are no studies analyzing their variability for smaller lakes. Here, we evaluated these coefficients through directly measured surface fluxes using the eddy‐covariance technique over more than 30 lakes and reservoirs of different sizes and depths. Our analysis showed that the transfer coefficients (adjusted to neutral atmospheric stability) were generally within the range reported in previous studies for large lakes and oceans. All transfer coefficients exhibit a substantial increase at low wind speeds (<3 m s −1 ), which was found to be associated with the presence of gusts and capillary waves (except Dalton number). Stanton number was found to be on average a factor of 1.3 higher than Dalton number, likely affecting the Bowen ratio method. At high wind speeds, the transfer coefficients remained relatively constant at values of 1.6·10 −3 , 1.4·10 −3 , 1.0·10 −3 , respectively. We found that the variability of the transfer coefficients among the lakes could be associated with lake surface area. In flux parameterizations at lake surfaces, it is recommended to consider variations in the drag coefficient and Stanton number due to wind gustiness and capillary wave roughness while Dalton number could be considered as constant at all wind speeds.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".