Internal Waves Force Elevated Turbulent Mixing at Barkley Canyon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Submarine canyons are hot spots for topography‐internal wave interactions, with elevated mixing contributing to regional water mass transport and productivity. Two velocity time series compare and contrast internal waves deep inside Barkley Canyon to a nearby site on the shelf‐break slope of the Vancouver Island Continental Shelf. Elevation of internal wave energy occurs near topography, up to a factor of 10 above the slope and 100 in the canyon. All frequency bands display strong seasonal variability but weak interannual variability. Diurnal ( K 1 ) energy is sub‐inertial, trapped along topography, and forced locally through barotropic motions. Both sites have high near‐inertial (NI) energy linked to wind events, though fewer events are observed deep inside the canyon. At the slope site, near‐inertial energy is attenuated with depth, while in the canyon it is amplified near the bottom. Freely propagating semidiurnal ( M 2 ) energy appears focused near critical shelf‐break and canyon floor topography, due to local and remote baroclinic forcing. The high‐frequency internal wave continuum has enhanced near‐bottom energy at both sites (up to 7 × the Garrett‐Munk spectrum), and inferred dissipation rates, ɛ , reaching 10 −7 W kg −1 near topography. Dissipation is most strongly correlated with semidiurnal energy variability at both sites, with secondary contributors that are site dependent. Forcing power law fits are on the slope, and NI 0.2 in the canyon. There is also a build‐up of “shoulder” energy ( P Sh ) near the buoyancy frequency, with a power law fit to dissipation of P Sh ∼ ɛ 0.3 at both sites.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".