MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057112162 · doi:10.1103/physreve.69.026305

One-dimensional Langevin models of fluid particle acceleration in developed turbulence

2004· article· en· W2057112162 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. K. Aringazin, M. I. Mazhitov

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review E · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicStatistical Mechanics and Entropy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccelerationStatistical physicsPhysicsTurbulenceLangevin equationProbability density functionLangevin dynamicsMoment (physics)MathematicsClassical mechanicsMechanicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We make a comparative analysis of some recent one-dimensional Langevin models of the acceleration of a Lagrangian fluid particle in developed turbulent flow. The class of models characterized by random intensities of noises (RIN models) provides a fit to the recent experimental data on the acceleration statistics. We review the model by Laval, Dubrulle, and Nazarenko (LDN) formulated in terms of temporal velocity derivative in the rapid distortion theory approach, and propose its extension due to the RIN framework. The fit of the contribution to fourth-order moment of the acceleration is found to be better than in the other stochastic models. We study the acceleration probability density function conditional on velocity fluctuations implied by the RIN approach to the LDN-type model. The shapes of the conditional distributions and the conditional acceleration variance have been found in a good agreement with the recent experimental data by Mordant, Crawford, and Bodenschatz [Physica D (to be published), e-print physics/0303003].

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.265 · 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
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

Citations20
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ESame topicStatistical Mechanics and EntropyFrench-language works237,207