MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387587545 · doi:10.1109/joe.2023.3269749

HF Radar Real-Time Alert to a Tsunami-Like Disturbance at Tofino on January 5, 2020: Surge or Tsunami?

2023· article· en· W4387587545 on OpenAlex
M.L. Heron, Baptiste Domps, Charles‐Antoine Guérin, Manman Wang, Leif Petersen

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsOcean Networks Canada SocietyUniversity of Victoria
FundersCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsBuoyRadarStorm surgeMeteorologyGeologySurgeStormWind waveEnvironmental scienceClimatologyOceanographyGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A real-time alert issued by a high frequency (HF) Wellen radar (WERA) at Tofino on January 5, 2020 was identified as a possible meteotsunami because of the anomalous surface currents. Reanalysis of the HF radar data and consideration of associated meteorological data from Global Forecast System North West Pacific forecasts, the GOES-17 weather satellite and the NDBC buoy at La Pérouse, indicate that the anomaly in ocean currents was a combination of a wind setup at the coast over several preceding hours and an abrupt change in wind direction driven by the passage of a severe cold front. It is unlikely that the Proudman resonance condition between the wind speed and gravity wave phase velocity existed, except perhaps very close to the coast. The inclusion of the wind direction measurements by the HF radar will improve the real-time alerts at the coast by discriminating between tsunamis and wind-driven storm surge events.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.830

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · 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