MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986296604 · doi:10.1002/num.20377

A priori and a posteriori error estimations for the dual mixed finite element method of the Navier‐Stokes problem

2008· article· en· W1986296604 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

VenueNumerical Methods for Partial Differential Equations · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsA priori and a posterioriMathematicsFinite element methodApplied mathematicsPartial differential equationDirichlet boundary conditionNonlinear systemDirichlet problemMathematical analysisDirichlet distributionDomain (mathematical analysis)Boundary value problem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article is concerned with a dual mixed formulation of the Navier‐Stokes system in a polygonal domain of the plane with Dirichlet boundary conditions and its numerical approximation. The gradient tensor, a quantity of practical interest, is introduced as a new unknown. The problem is then approximated by a mixed finite element method. Quasi‐optimal a priori error estimates are obtained. These a priori error estimates, an abstract nonlinear theory (similar to (Verfürth, RAIRO Model Math Anal Numer 32 (1998), 817–842)) and a posteriori estimates for the Stokes system from (Farhloul et al., Numer Funct Anal Optim 27 (2006), 831–846) lead to an a posteriori error estimate for the Navier‐Stokes system. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Numer Methods Partial Differential Eq, 2009

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.517
Threshold uncertainty score0.760

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.399
Teacher spread0.317 · 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