MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1911637565 · doi:10.1002/fld.2711

Automated critical point identification for PIV data using multimodal particle swarm optimization

2011· article· en· W1911637565 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNuclear Engineering Thermal-Hydraulics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationSwarm behaviourAlgorithmCritical point (mathematics)Computer scienceSaddle pointFlow (mathematics)Identification (biology)Mathematical optimizationMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY A hybrid sequential niche algorithm is used for the automated identification of critical points of velocity fields. This method combines an adaptive sequential niche technique with deterministic local optimization to detect critical points: focus, node and saddle points. A particle swarm algorithm performs a global search whereas vortex core identification functions compute the precise location as the extremum of the corresponding function. Once a critical point is found, a rectangular niche is constructed around the point. The particle swarm then proceeds to explore different regions of the velocity field. The process advances sequentially, avoiding areas near previously found critical points by blocking niches obtained from previous steps. The niche size is automatically adjusted each time a search enters inside an existing niche. Vortex core functions are used for critical point identification and calculating its precise location inside each niche. The procedure is validated on particle image velocimetry data obtained with two types of flows, an impinging jet flow and a flow downstream of a model building. The hybrid algorithm proved to be very efficient and robust for automated detection and identification of critical points. It can be used as a first step for studying the time‐dependent dynamic behavior of instantaneous velocity fields by tracking topological critical points. This is the first study that uses a multi‐modal particle swarm algorithm for critical point identification. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.720

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.308 · 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