MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968730130 · doi:10.1103/physreve.65.046202

Stabilization of stationary excitation pulses in an open flow without long-range inhibition

2002· article· en· W1968730130 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Mads Kærn, Michael Menzinger

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNonlinear Dynamics and Pattern Formation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFlow (mathematics)ExcitationInflowMechanicsPulse (music)PhysicsBoundary layerFlow velocityOscillation (cell signaling)DiffusionBoundary (topology)Range (aeronautics)Upstream (networking)External flowOpticsMaterials scienceChemistryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study numerically and experimentally the stabilization of stationary excitation pulses in an open flow system. Since all the species have equal flow and diffusion coefficients, stabilization of stationary pulses by long-range inhibition is excluded. Upstream propagating pulses slow down as they approach the inflow boundary, where a constant forcing establishes a downstream extending subexcitable boundary layer. When the flow velocity is low, successive pulses vanish as they reach the subexcitable region. When the flow velocity is increased, the incoming pulses pile up near the inflow one after the other to form a stationary and space-periodic structure. This occurs in such a manner that the system remembers and stores the number of incoming pulses. We show that flow-induced stabilization of stationary pulses involves a mechanism by which the upstream subexcitable region and the flow cause the arrest of the pulse front and the pulse back, respectively. We discuss how the flow-stabilized structures compare to, and are different from those stabilized by a long-ranged, diffusive inhibition and from those observed in boundary-forced open flows of media showing relaxation-type oscillations.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.305 · 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

Citations7
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topicsSame topicNonlinear Dynamics and Pattern FormationFrench-language works237,207