MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061318403 · doi:10.1002/fld.1118

MPDATA error estimator for mesh adaptivity

2005· article· en· W2061318403 on OpenAlexaff
Joanna Szmelter, Piotr K. Smolarkiewicz

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolygon meshSolverRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceAdaptive mesh refinementBenchmark (surveying)EstimatorEuler equationsAlgorithmMathematical optimizationMesh generationCompressible flowApplied mathematicsComputational scienceMathematicsCompressibilityFinite element methodGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In multidimensional positive definite advection transport algorithm (MPDATA) the leading error as well as the first‐ and second‐order solutions are known explicitly by design. This property is employed to construct refinement indicators for mesh adaptivity. Recent progress with the edge‐based formulation of MPDATA facilitates the use of the method in an unstructured‐mesh environment. In particular, the edge‐based data structure allows for flow solvers to operate on arbitrary hybrid meshes, thereby lending itself to implementations of various mesh adaptivity techniques. A novel unstructured‐mesh nonoscillatory forward‐in‐time (NFT) solver for compressible Euler equations is used to illustrate the benefits of adaptive remeshing as well as mesh movement and enrichment for the efficacy of MPDATA‐based flow solvers. Validation against benchmark test cases demonstrates robustness and accuracy of the approach. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.374 · 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

Citations29
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in FluidsSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207