MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7119475350 · doi:10.1098/rspa.2025.0332

Towards a theory for the formation of sea stacks

2025· article· en· W7119475350 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological formations and processes
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCliffDebrisSinuosityStack (abstract data type)ErosionShoreInstability

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We provide a continuum model that has the capability to explain the dynamical processes which lead to the formation of sea stacks. The basic concept is that a uniformly retreating sea cliff face can be unstable to the formation of spatial undulations, initially as sine waves, but with increasing contortion as the sinuosity develops. The mechanism for instability is the positive feedback created by enhanced erosion rate caused by the shore debris created by cliff collapse. This mechanism is somewhat similar to the morphological effects of wave-induced sand transport in forming irregular beach-bounded coastlines. The key ingredient of the theory which can potentially enable cave formation and isolated stacks to occur is that the relevant spatial variable describing along-shore transport is the along-shore arc length. We formulate the model, show that it provides the sought-for instability, and give numerical solutions for the resulting shore-line. As yet, we have not found self-intersecting shore-lines, which would be the harbinger of sea stack formation.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.213
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueProceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering SciencesSame topicGeological formations and processesFrench-language works237,207