MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044030974 · doi:10.2202/1934-2659.1197

Finite Element Modeling of Viscous Mixing: A Review

2008· review· en· W2044030974 on OpenAlexaff
Mourad Héniche, Philippe A. Tanguy

Bibliographic record

VenueChemical Product and Process Modeling · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodMixing (physics)SolverNewtonian fluidComputational fluid dynamicsNon-Newtonian fluidFlow (mathematics)Computer scienceMechanical engineeringField (mathematics)Viscous liquidMechanicsComputational scienceMathematical optimizationEngineeringMathematicsPhysicsStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this paper is to review the application of the finite element-based CFD methods in mixing engineering. It provides a good opportunity to summarize the thirty five years of finite element achievements in the field of fluid flow started in the 70's, with the development of the first 2D Navier-Stokes solver for Newtonian and non-Newtonian viscous fluids, and extended in the 80's, with new solution algorithms to tackle 3D problems. For mixing simulations, a corner stone was the introduction of the "virtual finite element method" in the mid 90's for the simulation of flow systems with internal moving parts. In the on-going quest to improve the characterization of mixing systems for industrial needs, further developments are required, and progress could come from the next generation of computationally efficient multi-physics solvers.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemical Product and Process ModelingSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207