MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121888328 · doi:10.1002/cjce.21629

Meso‐scale simulations of solid–liquid flow and strategies for meso–macro coupling

2011· article· en· W2121888328 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
J.J. Derksen

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLattice Boltzmann Simulation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReynolds numberLattice Boltzmann methodsDimensionless quantityStokes numberMechanicsStatistical physicsStokes flowDirect numerical simulationInertiaFlow (mathematics)ThermodynamicsMaterials sciencePhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Solid–liquid flows span a large parameter space, with dimensionless coordinates such as Stokes numbers, the solids volume fraction, the density ratio between the phases, and Reynolds numbers (e.g., associated with the continuous phase flow). We are interested in systems with appreciable inertia effects—that is, nonzero Stokes and Reynolds numbers—having density ratios of the order of one and solids volume fractions of order 0.1. In such flows, direct numerical simulations are desired to reveal the relevant interactions. The resolution required for DNS limits the size of the systems that we are able to simulate to the meso‐scale. In this article, examples of direct simulations based on the lattice‐Boltzmann method of dense solid–liquid flows are presented, along with suggestions as to how to use their results at the macro‐scale. © 2011 Canadian Society for Chemical Engineering

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.206 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Chemical EngineeringSame topicLattice Boltzmann Simulation StudiesFrench-language works237,207