MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001552359 · doi:10.1088/1364-7830/4/4/301

Semi-analytical validation of a dynamic large-eddy simulation procedure for turbulent premixed flames via the <i>G</i>-equation

2000· article· en· W2001552359 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCombustion Theory and Modelling · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicCombustion and flame dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLarge eddy simulationScalingMechanicsTurbulenceStatistical physicsFlow (mathematics)A priori and a posterioriRange (aeronautics)PhysicsMathematicsMaterials scienceGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of a dynamic subgrid model for the turbulent burning speed of a premixed flame is investigated for a series of idealized test cases where the flame front is wrinkled by a multiple-scale shear flow; a rigorous asymptotic subgrid model is also implemented for comparison. Explicit formulae for the flame wrinkled shape and turbulent speed are available to generate a reference database. The role of the subgrid wrinkling models is to achieve the same overall flame shape and propagation speed in a simulation where only the largest scales of the flow are explicitly accounted for. Very good results are obtained when the subgrid burning speed enhancement is estimated using the asymptotic subgrid model. On the other hand, the dynamic model attempts to exploit the scaling observable in the simulation to extrapolate the turbulent burning speed enhancement in the original system. The performance of this strategy is adequate for some regimes but poor for others; the source of the problem is traced back to the existence of a scaling transition that occurs as the flame propagating speed is adjusted during the large-eddy simulation. A modification to the scaling of the enhanced burning is implemented to account for the existence of the two distinct scaling ranges; it improves significantly the predictions of the dynamic model away from the transition, but results in the near-critical range remain predictably very poor compared with the rigorous asymptotic model results. These conclusions based on a priori performance for the reference steady data are confirmed by comparing unsteady large-eddy and direct simulations. Results based on rigorous mathematical tools are possible here because of the separation of length scales in the special class of idealized flow fields used in this study: their relevance to more realistic flows is also discussed.

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 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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.688
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.229 · 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