Geometry and interaction of structures in homogeneous isotropic turbulence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A strategy to extract turbulence structures from direct numerical simulation (DNS) data is described along with a systematic analysis of geometry and spatial distribution of the educed structures. A DNS dataset of decaying homogeneous isotropic turbulence at Reynolds number ${\mathit{Re}}_{\lambda } = 141$ is considered. A bandpass filtering procedure is shown to be effective in extracting enstrophy and dissipation structures with their smallest scales matching the filter width, $L$ . The geometry of these educed structures is characterized and classified through the use of two non-dimensional quantities, ‘planarity’ and ‘filamentarity’, obtained using the Minkowski functionals. The planarity increases gradually by a small amount as $L$ is decreased, and its narrow variation suggests a nearly circular cross-section for the educed structures. The filamentarity increases significantly as $L$ decreases demonstrating that the educed structures become progressively more tubular. An analysis of the preferential alignment between the filtered strain and vorticity fields reveals that vortical structures of a given scale $L$ are most likely to align with the largest extensional strain at a scale 3–5 times larger than $L$ . This is consistent with the classical energy cascade picture, in which vortices of a given scale are stretched by and absorb energy from structures of a somewhat larger scale. The spatial distribution of the educed structures shows that the enstrophy structures at the $5\eta $ scale (where $\eta $ is the Kolmogorov scale) are more concentrated near the ones that are 3–5 times larger, which gives further support to the classical picture. Finally, it is shown by analysing the volume fraction of the educed enstrophy structures that there is a tendency for them to cluster around a larger structure or clusters of larger structures.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".