MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399678527 · doi:10.1063/5.0209727

Predictability of decaying stratified turbulence

2024· article· en· W4399678527 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Diaz, Michael L. Waite

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMeteorological Phenomena and Simulations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPredictabilityTurbulencePhysicsStatistical physicsTurbulence kinetic energyWavenumberContext (archaeology)IsotropyK-epsilon turbulence modelKinetic energyReynolds numberStratified flowsMechanicsBuoyancyK-omega turbulence modelDirect numerical simulationClassical mechanicsStratified flowGeologyOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predictability of geophysical fluid dynamics at various scales remains a crucial challenge for accurate weather and climate forecasting. Following the pioneering framework established by Lorenz, numerous studies on homogeneous and isotropic turbulence have demonstrated that flows characterized by diverse scales may exhibit limited predictability. This limitation arises from the inevitable amplification of errors in the initial conditions from small scales to larger scales, even if the initial error is confined to small scales. This research investigates the predictability of freely decaying homogeneous stratified turbulence, which serves as a representative model for small-scale geophysical turbulence where rotational effects are negligible. Direct numerical simulations are employed to assess predictability by analyzing the growth of errors introduced in pairs of simulations with near-identical initial conditions; errors are modeled as the difference field of the pair. Previous studies have established a connection between the finite range of predictability and the slope of the kinetic energy spectrum. In the context of stratified turbulence, the shape of the energy spectrum exhibits a dependence on the buoyancy Reynolds number (Reb), particularly at lower values of Reb. This work conducts a comparative analysis of both the energy spectra and the error growth behavior across different regimes of stratified turbulence, encompassing a range of Reb values from O(1) to O(10). The sensitivity of the obtained results to the introduced error is investigated. Modifying the geometrical shape of the error (spherical vs cylindrical complement) and the cutoff wavenumber while maintaining the initial error kinetic energy did not significantly alter the error dynamics. The results are robust to variations in the method of error introduction.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicMeteorological Phenomena and SimulationsFrench-language works237,207