Aerodynamic Optimization Algorithm with Integrated Geometry Parameterization and Mesh Movement
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An efficient gradient-based algorithm for aerodynamic shape optimization is presented. The algorithm consists of several components, including a novel integrated geometry parameterization and mesh movement, a parallel Newton―Krylov flow solver, and an adjoint-based gradient evaluation. To integrate geometry parameterization and mesh movement, generalized B-spline volumes are used to parameterize both the surface and volume mesh. The volume mesh of B-spline control points mimics a coarse mesh; a linear elasticity mesh-movement algorithm is applied directly to this coarse mesh and the fine mesh is regenerated algebraically. Using this approach, mesh-movement time is reduced by two to three orders of magnitude relative to a node-based movement. The mesh-adjoint system also becomes smaller and is thus amenable to complex-step derivative approximations. When solving the flow-adjoint equations using restarted Krylov-subspace methods, a nested-subspace strategy is shown to be more robust than truncating the entire subspace. Optimization is accomplished using a sequential-quadratic-programming algorithm. The effectiveness of the complete algorithm is demonstrated using a lift-constrained induced-drag minimization that involves large changes in geometry.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it