MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136699493 · doi:10.2514/6.2007-4087

Development of Stencil-Based Mesh Partitioning for Parallel Unstructured CFD Solvers

2007· article· en· W2136699493 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vladimyr Gidzak, Ioannis Nompelis, Graham V. Candler

Bibliographic record

Venue18th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGas Dynamics and Kinetic Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchMinistry of Economy, Trade and Industry
KeywordsStencilComputer scienceParallel computingComputational fluid dynamicsComputational sciencePolygon meshMesh generationUnstructured gridComputer architectureComputer graphics (images)Finite element methodEngineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A study evaluating unstructured mesh partitioning for computational uid dynamics (CFD) simulations on parallel computers is presented. Considerations for eectiv e partitioning of computational unstructured meshes for a family of implicit time-integration methods using the line-relaxation algorithm are outlined. Mesh partitioning using the Metis library is evaluated for two- and three-dimensional meshes. Dieren t combinations of computational stencil information provided to the partitioning library are outlined and comparison of the resulted load balance and communication volume measures are presented. An augmentation to the existing mesh partitioning method via a heuristic algorithm is proposed. The heuristic algorithm relies on an initial partitioning of the mesh, which is then rened iteratively. Results using the new method are compared with the standard partitioning methods. This is done both from a theoretical perspective and by running the CFD code. Elapsed time results of the CFD code are presented from simulations on a parallel computer. Results show that the improved partitioning using the stencil information and the heuristic algorithm result in faster turn-around times. The stencil-based partitioning and the proposed heuristic algorithm are simple modications to existing codes and are applicable to general simulations employing domain decomposition.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue18th AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics ConferenceSame topicGas Dynamics and Kinetic TheoryFrench-language works237,207