Flow at the interface of a model fibrous porous medium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Planar flow in the interfacial region of an open porous medium is investigated by finding solutions for Stokes flow in a channel partially filled with an array of circular cylinders beside one wall. The cylinders are in a square array oriented across the flow and are widely spaced, so that the solid volume fraction ϕ is 0.1 or less. For this spacing, singularity methods are appropriate and so they are used to find solutions for both planar Couette flow and Poiseuille flow in the open portion of the channel. The solutions, accurate to O(ϕ), are used to calculate the apparent slip velocity at the interface, Us, and results obtained for Us are presented in terms of a dimensionless slip velocity. For shear-driven flow, this dimensionless quantity is found to depend only weakly on ϕ and to be independent of the height of the array relative to the height of the channel and independent of the cylinder size relative to the height of the channel. For pressure-driven flow, Us is found to be less than that under comparable shear-flow conditions, and dependent on cylinder size and filling fraction in this case. Calculations also show that the external flow penetrates the porous medium very little, even for sparse arrays, and that Us is about one quarter of the velocity predicted by the Brinkman model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".