MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988386574 · doi:10.1080/10407790.2014.964531

Turbulent Dispersion of a Passive Scalar in a Staggered Array of Cubes

2014· article· en· W1988386574 on OpenAlexaff
Bing-Chen Wang, Eugene Yee, Fue‐Sang Lien

Bibliographic record

VenueNumerical Heat Transfer Part B Fundamentals · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooDefence Research and Development CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceMechanicsScalar (mathematics)Turbulence kinetic energyReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equationsBoundary layerMean flowContext (archaeology)Reynolds numberPhysicsDissipationDispersion (optics)OpticsComputational physicsMathematicsGeometryGeologyThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we report a numerical and experimental study of turbulent dispersion of a passive scalar released from a continuous ground-level point source in a staggered array of 16 × 16 cubical obstacles. Experimental measurements of the flow and dispersion were obtained in a boundary-layer water channel using laser-induced fluorescence (for concentration) and laser Doppler velocimetry (for velocity). Numerical simulations of the flow and scalar fields for this experimental configuration were performed using two in-house computer codes based on the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) method. Results of a detailed comparison between water-channel measurements and model predictions of the mean flow, turbulence kinetic energy, mean concentration, and concentration variance are presented. An advanced model for the concentration variance dissipation rate is validated in the new context of plume dispersion within and above a staggered array of cubical obstacles.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNumerical Heat Transfer Part B FundamentalsSame topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207