Determining the relative stability of leading-edge vortices on nominally two-dimensional flapping profiles
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
Abstract It is hypothesized that the relative stability of leading-edge vortices (LEVs) on flapping profiles can be improved by moderating LEV growth through spanwise vorticity convection and vortex stretching. Moreover, it is hypothesized that the reduced frequency $k$ and profile sweep ${\it\Lambda}$ are critical in predicting relative LEV stability as determined by the aforementioned effects. These hypotheses are then confirmed experimentally with phase-averaged particle image velocimetry (PIV) and three-dimensional particle tracking velocimetry. In particular, more stable LEVs are observed at higher reduced frequencies, which is argued to represent the ratio between the limiting vortex size and the rate of vorticity feeding. The introduction of profile sweep increased both relative LEV stability and spanwise vorticity transport. It is thought that spanwise vorticity transport improved LEV stability by acting as a sink for vorticity generated in the leading-edge shear layer.
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 | 0.002 | 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