MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965600007 · doi:10.1063/1.3585688

Ionizing shocks in argon. Part I: Collisional-radiative model and steady-state structure

2011· article· en· W1965600007 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. G. Kapper, J.‐L. Cambier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Physics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGas Dynamics and Kinetic Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific Research
KeywordsRadiative transferRadiative coolingMetastabilityPhysicsAtomic physicsShock (circulatory)IonizationElectronRelaxation (psychology)MechanicsComputational physicsNuclear physicsThermodynamicsIonOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A detailed collisional-radiative model is developed and coupled with a single-fluid, two-temperature convection model for the transport of shock-heated argon. The model is used in a systematic approach to examine the effects of the collision cross sections on the shock structure, including the relaxation layer and subsequent radiative-cooling regime. We present a comparison with previous experimental results obtained at the University of Toronto’s Institute of Aerospace Studies and the Australian National University, which serve as benchmarks to the model. It is shown here that ionization proceeds via the ladder-climbing mechanism, in which the upper levels play a dominant role as compared to the metastable states. Taking this into account, the present model is able to accurately reproduce the metastable populations in the relaxation zone measured in previous experiments, which is not possible with a two-step model. Our numerical results of the radiative-cooling region are in close agreement with experiments and have been obtained without having to consider radiative transport. In particular, it found that spontaneous emission involving the upper levels together with Bremsstrahlung emission account for nearly all radiative losses; all other significant radiative processes, resulting in transitions into the ground-state, are mostly self-absorbed and have a lesser impact. The effects of electron heat conduction are also considered and shown to have a large impact on the electron-priming region immediately behind the shock front; however, the overall effect on the induction length, i.e., the distance between the shock front and the electron avalanche, is small.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations81
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied PhysicsSame topicGas Dynamics and Kinetic TheoryFrench-language works237,207