MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098706074 · doi:10.2514/6.2009-496

Radiation and Absorbing Boundary Conditions for the Lattice Boltzmann Method

2009· article· en· W2098706074 on OpenAlex
Alireza Najafi­-Yazdi, Luc Mongeau

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.

Bibliographic record

Venue47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAerodynamics and Acoustics in Jet Flows
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLattice Boltzmann methodsHPP modelBoundary value problemPhysicsStatistical physicsComputer scienceComputational physicsMechanicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Lattice Boltzmann Method (LBM) is a well established computational tool for fluid flow simulations. This method has been utilized for low Mach number Computational Aeroacoustics (CAA). Robust and nonreflective boundary conditions, similar to those used in Navier-Stokes solvers, are needed for LBM-based CAA. One challenge is that proper boundary conditions be specified in terms of the particle distribution function rather than the usual hydrodynamic properties. The focus of the present study was to develop radiation boundary conditions and perfectly matched layers (PML) for LBM. Such boundary conditions were formulated and tested using benchmark acoustic problems. The perfectly matched layer concept appears to be very well suited for LBM, and yielded very low acoustic reflection factor.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.270 · 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