Swish Floats: An Inexpensive Neutrally Buoyant Float to Monitor Dispersion in Coastal Seas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Neutrally buoyant floats have been widely used to measure flows in the ocean, but deploying them in large numbers can be costly and impractical. This is particularly true near coastlines due to the elevated risk of instrument grounding or vessel collisions, resulting in a lack of subsurface Lagrangian measurements in coastal regions. Here, we describe an inexpensive neutrally buoyant satellite-tracked float (named “Swallow-ish,” or “Swish” floats) that has been designed and tested as a cost-effective strategy to measure subsurface dispersion in coastal areas on time scales up to a month. These autonomous instruments are inexpensive, constructed at a material cost of CAD $300 per unit; lightweight, with a mass of 5.4 kg; isopycnal; and constructed from commercially available components, using recently available global navigation satellite system technology to provide the user with a point-to-point measure of subsurface transport. We describe the float design, ballasting techniques, and the governing equations that determine their behavior. Further, through 29 deployments in two coastal seas, we calculate an uncertainty budget and determine a ballasting error of ±1.6 g, corresponding to a local depth targeting error of 16–30 m, analyze the float resurfacing data to calculate subsurface dispersion coefficients, and examine the float depth records to quantify the local internal wave field. Finally, we evaluate surface dispersion using the postresurfacing trajectories. Our findings indicate that Swish floats offer a cost-effective alternative for Lagrangian measurements of subsurface flows in coastal regions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".