Interactions between Surface Waves, Tides, and Storm-Induced Currents over Shelf Waters of the Northwest Atlantic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A coupled wave–tide–circulation model is used to investigate wave–current interactions (WCIs) over the shelf waters of the Northwest Atlantic (NWA) during Hurricane Earl (2010). WCIs have substantial impacts on hydrodynamics in the upper ocean. The significant wave heights are modulated by WCIs, particularly over regions with strong current gradients, with a reduction up to ~2.1 m (20%) during the storm. Noticeable decreases in surface elevations and tidal currents occur in regions with strong tides such as the Gulf of Maine, mainly due to the wave-enhanced bottom stress. Over regions with weak tidal currents, wave effects on currents are dominated by two competitive processes between wave-induced forces and wave-enhanced mixing. The former strengthens surface currents (up to ~0.55 m/s) and increases the peak storm surge (up to ~0.48 m). The latter is responsible for the reduction in storm-induced surface currents (up to ~0.94 m/s) and anticyclonic modulation of current directions. Vertically, WCIs extend the strong vertical current shear and shift it downward during the storm, which enhances the local mixing and changes the structures of near-inertial oscillations (NIOs). Moreover, tidal currents also change the magnitudes of the NIOs and subtidal currents and affect the intensity of WCIs.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".