MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1992524026 · doi:10.2495/dne-v4-n3-285-299

On the use of colour in experimental fluid mechanics

2010· article· en· W1992524026 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. T. Turner

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchematicCLARITYComputer scienceMeasure (data warehouse)Representation (politics)Engineering drawingArtificial intelligenceMathematicsData miningEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses how colour is used in experimental fl uid fl ow studies.Firstly, colour (defi ned scientifi cally by the wavelength of the light) can be used to discriminate between different channels in optical instrumentation, making it possible to measure several fl ow properties, simultaneously, and without any intrusion into the fl ow.These aspects of modern fl ow measurement are discussed in terms of some examples.Alternatively, the results of the fl ow measurement may be represented in the form of images, graphs and three-dimensional schematics with colour being used to identify and emphasise particular features that might otherwise remain concealed.The experimental results presented in the paper confi rm that using colour to discriminate between sets of data has several important advantages over the older black and white or grey scale forms of representation.Not only do colours provide an excellent basis for communication through graphical and three-dimensional presentations, but the resulting clarity may also help to reveal complex forms of fl uid fl ow behaviour.Moreover, the inherent artistic appeal of some colour representations can draw the viewer into the technical detail, helping to simplify physical phenomena in ways that would not otherwise be possible.Although the observations made on the presentation of data are illustrated with reference to a number of experimental fl uid fl ow problems, many of the methods and observations would be applicable in other situations, where scientifi c or technological data needs to be presented.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.016
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics→Same topicMethane Hydrates and Related Phenomena→French-language works237,207→