Fundamental aspects of the vortex flow on cones. Angular characterization of hyperlifting vortex torques; the law of filiation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes in detail the fundamental aspects of the vortex flow developed on the upper surface of a cone having an apex angle of 68.6°. It is one of a large number of studies carried out in the wind tunnel of the Valenciennes University aerodynamics and hydrodynamics laboratory whereby visualizations have enabled the flow of vortex structures to be monitored and consequently their development and positioning, under the influence of apex angles and at increasing angles of incidence, to be determined and defined. The existence and the preferential nature of intervortex angles are here confirmed and it has been found, by analogy with studies carried out on other types of slender bodies, that the law of filiation is applicable to the angular characterization of hyperlifting vortex torques and to the angular correspondence existing between their main and secondary structures. These findings suggest that there is a certain universality in the behaviour of these properties although no current theory would seem to be able as yet to provide a straightforward explanation of the phenomena.PACS Nos.: 44, 47
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".