MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091040444 · doi:10.4310/cms.2004.v2.n4.a1

Computation of a Moving Drop/Bubble on a Solid Surface using a Front-Tracking Method

2004· article· en· W2091040444 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Mathematical Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaYork University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsTracking (education)ComputationSolid surfaceBubbleFront (military)Drop (telecommunication)MechanicsSurface (topology)Materials sciencePhysicsMathematicsComputer scienceGeometryMeteorologyAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper we outline a front-tracking method for computing the moving contact line. In particular, we are interested in the motion of two-dimensional drops and bubbles on a partially wetting surface exposed to shear flows. Peskin's Immersed Boundary Method is used to model the liquid-gas interface, similar to the approach used by Unverdi and Traggvason. The movement near the moving contact line is modelled by a slip condition, the value of the dynamic contact angle is determined by a linear model, and the local forces are introduced at the moving contact lines based on a relationship of moving contact angle and contact line speed. Numerical examples show that the method can be applied to the motion of drops and bubbles on a solid surface over a wide range of parameter values.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.384
Teacher spread0.298 · 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