MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modelling Surface Waves in Lake Erie

2025· preprint· en· W4409743145 on OpenAlexaff
Olivia Green, Ryan P. Mulligan, Leon Boegman

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and environmental studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceGeologyMeteorologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lake Erie is the shallowest of the Great Lakes with a unique bathymetry making it susceptible to storm surges and sediment resuspension. Surface waves effects these events which has an impact on biological diversity and surrounding communities. The simulation of surface waves is important for developing a better understanding of their effects on Lake Erie, and in this study a coupled DELFT3D-SWAN model was used to simulate waves during a major storm event. Significant wave height data from buoys were used to compare to the modelled wave heights and validate the model. The bottom friction coefficient was adjusted to determine the effects of the shallow depth of Lake Erie on the simulated wave height. During weather conditions in Lake Erie defined as winds between 2.50 m/s and 15.0 m/s, changing the bottom friction coefficient has a limited effect on modelled of significant wave height. During weather events with winds greater than 15.0 m/s, bottom friction does influence the significant wave height. The stronger winds generate large waves which results in more energy loss from bottom friction. The bottom friction coefficient is different for each basin when investigating wave heights larger than 3.00 m. For the western, central, and eastern basin, the recommended JONSWAP bottom friction is different due the different bathymetry of each basin. When simulating the lake during typical conditions or when investigating all three basins, a value of 0.067 m 2 /s 3 is recommended as it is the most accurate of the simulations with a root mean square error (RMSE) = 0.33 m and a R 2 = 0.81. The model performs with a similar error to previous Great Lakes wave models making it a valid model to use to simulate waves in Lake Erie.

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)0.000
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 score0.901
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine and environmental studiesFrench-language works237,207