MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1644631193 · doi:10.1063/1.2729713

A Lagrangian finite volume method for the simulation of flows with moving boundaries

2007· article· en· W1644631193 on OpenAlexaff
Riadh Ata, Azzeddine Soulaïmani, Francisco Chinesta

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP conference proceedings · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics Simulations and Interactions
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInviscid flowFinite volume methodApplied mathematicsFinite element methodQuadrilateralMathematicsMathematical optimizationPolygon meshComputationBoundary value problemDiscretizationMathematical analysisComputer scienceGeometryMechanicsAlgorithmPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper a Lagrangian formulation of the Natural Element Method (NEM) is proposed to solve shallow water inviscid flows. NEM is a particle‐based method which revealed its capabilities in handling large distortion problems. Its main advantage is the interpolant character of its shape function and consequently the easiness of imposing Dirichlet boundary conditions.In this paper we use the NEM method in a collocation form and in a Lagrangian kinematic description. This formulation is found to be a finite volume methodology with flux computation on the Voronoï diagram of the standard triangular or quadrilateral meshes. The Shallow‐Water equations are used as the mathematical model. Besides the Lagrangian behavior of the flow which is difficult to capture, these equations have discontinuous solutions. Thus, stabilization issues have been considered. Some inviscid bidimensional flows are used as preliminary benchmark tests. This kind of flows is similar to that of metal casting. Good results were found which promise an interesting future for this method in more complicated applications.

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 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)0.000
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.932
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP conference proceedingsSame topicFluid Dynamics Simulations and InteractionsFrench-language works237,207