MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986562656 · doi:10.1038/srep09765

Twin tubular pinch effect in curving confined flows

2015· article· en· W1986562656 on OpenAlexaff
Liviu Clime, Keith Morton, Xuyen D. Hoa, Teodor Veres

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueNational Research Council Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuoyancyMechanicsReynolds numberFictitious forceNeutral buoyancyPhysicsInertial frame of referenceInertiaRADIUSParticle (ecology)Classical mechanicsCurvatureGeometryGeologyTurbulenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Colloidal suspensions of buoyancy neutral particles flowing in circular pipes focus into narrow distributions near the wall due to lateral migration effects associated with fluid inertia. In curving flows, these distributions are altered by Dean currents and the interplay between Reynolds and Dean numbers is used to predict equilibrium positions. Here, we propose a new description of inertial lateral migration in curving flows that expands current understanding of both focusing dynamics and equilibrium distributions. We find that at low Reynolds numbers, the ratio δ between lateral inertial migration and Dean forces scales simply with the particle radius, coil curvature and pipe radius as (Rp(3)R)/a(4). A critical value δc = 0.148 of this parameter is identified along with two related inertial focusing mechanisms. In the regime below δc, coined subcritical, Dean forces generate permanently circulating, twinned annuli, each with intricate equilibrium particle distributions including eyes and trailing arms. At δ > δc (supercritical regime) inertial lateral migration forces are dominant and particles focus to a single stable equilibrium position.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMicrofluidic and Bio-sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207