Interaction of a vortex pair with a flexible plate in an ideal quiescent fluid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The coupled interaction of a cantilevered Kirchhoff–Love plate with two vortex filaments of equal and opposite circulation in an infinite incompressible, inviscid, and irrotational fluid domain is investigated. The vortices initially advect toward the cantilevered plate, which is oriented perpendicular to the direction of propagation of the vortex pair and undergoes cylindrical bending. As the pair approaches the plate, the pressure field induced by the vortices deflects the plate and initiates vibration of the structure. The vibration of the structure, in turn, alters the path of the two vortices. The level of interaction depends on the vortex circulation and on the ratio of the plate inertia to the fluid inertia, termed the mass ratio. In general, the vortices tend to pass around the plate and eventually advect away from the plate, albeit with a modified trajectory, which depends on the strength of the fluid and structure coupling. The energy imparted to the plate increases with increasing vortex circulation and decreasing mass ratio. The findings of this study provide an initial framework for assessing the energy that can be imparted to a plate for energy harvesting purposes by coherent fluid structures in the absence of viscous effects.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".