MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000794875 · doi:10.1103/physrevc.90.024912

Transport coefficients of bulk viscous pressure in the 14-moment approximation

2014· article· en· W2000794875 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel S. Denicol, Sangyong Jeon, Charles Gale

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review C · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViscous stress tensorVolume viscosityCauchy stress tensorThermodynamicsTensor (intrinsic definition)ViscosityShear stressPhysicsShear rateRelaxation (psychology)Shear (geology)MechanicsClassical mechanicsMaterials scienceMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We compute the transport coefficients that appear in the fluid-dynamical equations for the bulk viscous pressure and shear-stress tensor using the 14-moment approximation in the limit of small, but finite, masses. In this limit, we are able to express all these coefficients in terms of known thermodynamic quantities, such as the thermodynamic pressure, energy density, and the velocity of sound. We explicitly demonstrate that the ratio of bulk viscosity to bulk relaxation time behaves very differently, as a function of temperature, than the ratio of shear viscosity to shear relaxation time. We further explicitly compute, for the first time, the transport coefficients that couple the bulk viscous pressure to the shear-stress tensor and vice versa. The coefficient that couples bulk viscous pressure to shear-stress tensor is found to be orders of magnitude larger than the bulk viscosity itself, suggesting that bulk viscous pressure production owes more to this coupling than to the expansion rate of the system.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations183
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review CSame topicHigh-Energy Particle Collisions ResearchFrench-language works237,207