MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tetrahedral Embedded Boundary Methods for Accurate and Flexible Adaptive Fluids

2010· article· en· W2075418377 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher Batty, Stefan Xenos, Ben Houston

Bibliographic record

VenueComputer Graphics Forum · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer sciencePolygon meshBoundary (topology)Delaunay triangulationComputational scienceTetrahedronSpurious relationshipVolume meshMesh generationAlgorithmFlexibility (engineering)Cartesian coordinate systemTopology (electrical circuits)GeometryFinite element methodComputer graphics (images)MathematicsStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract When simulating fluids, tetrahedral methods provide flexibility and ease of adaptivity that Cartesian grids find difficult to match. However, this approach has so far been limited by two conflicting requirements. First, accurate simulation requires quality Delaunay meshes and the use of circumcentric pressures. Second, meshes must align with potentially complex moving surfaces and boundaries, necessitating continuous remeshing. Unfortunately, sacrificing mesh quality in favour of speed yields inaccurate velocities and simulation artifacts. We describe how to eliminate the boundary‐matching constraint by adapting recent embedded boundary techniques to tetrahedra, so that neither air nor solid boundaries need to align with mesh geometry. This enables the use of high quality, arbitrarily graded, non‐conforming Delaunay meshes, which are simpler and faster to generate. Temporal coherence can also be exploited by reusing meshes over adjacent timesteps to further reduce meshing costs. Lastly, our free surface boundary condition eliminates the spurious currents that previous methods exhibited for slow or static scenarios. We provide several examples demonstrating that our efficient tetrahedral embedded boundary method can substantially increase the flexibility and accuracy of adaptive Eulerian fluid simulation.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.328 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations51
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComputer Graphics ForumSame topicComputer Graphics and Visualization TechniquesFrench-language works237,207