MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100588198 · doi:10.2514/1.33836

Mesh Movement for a Discrete-Adjoint Newton-Krylov Algorithm for Aerodynamic Optimization

2008· article· en· W2100588198 on OpenAlexafffund
Anh Hoang Truong, Chad Oldfield, David W. Zingg

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversity of TorontoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsAerodynamicsComputer scienceComputational fluid dynamicsAlgorithmMathematicsApplied mathematicsMathematical optimizationPhysicsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A grid movement algorithm based on the linear elasticity method with multiple increments is presented. The method is relatively computationally expensive but is exceptionally robust, producing high-quality elements even for large shape changes. It is integrated with an aerodynamic shape optimization algorithm that uses an augmented adjoint approach for gradient calculation. The discrete-adjoint equations are augmented to explicitly include the sensitivities of the mesh movement, resulting in an increase in efficiency and numerical accuracy. This gradient computation method requires less computational time than a function evaluation and leads to significant computational savings as dimensionality is increased. The results of the application of these techniques to several large deformation and optimization cases are presented. Nomenclature A = coordinates of the airfoil surface E = modulus of elasticity f = external forces G = coordinates of the interior grid nodes J, F = objective functions i = increment number K = stiffness matrix L = Lagrangian l = length of a side of a triangle n = number of increments P = potential energy Q = flow variables R = radius of a circumscribed circle R = flow residual r = residual of the grid movement equations s = semiperimeter of a triangle u = element displacements V = element volume X = design variables = boundary , = adjoint vector = radius of an inscribed circle = stress tensor = element shape quality = spatial domain Subscripts e = belonging to an element t = belonging to the entire system jQ = Q is held constant in the differentiation = subtriangular element inside a quadrilateral Superscripts ^ = known variable on the boundary T = transpose

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)0.002
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations73
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA JournalSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207