MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140507140 · doi:10.1002/fld.1555

Parallel large eddy simulation of turbulent flow around MIRA model using linear equal‐order finite element method

2007· article· en· W2140507140 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Methods in Computational Mathematics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbulenceLarge eddy simulationDomain decomposition methodsLaminar flowComputational fluid dynamicsDetached eddy simulationDirect numerical simulationComputer scienceTurbulence modelingMechanicsPhysicsFinite element methodReynolds numberReynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes equations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A parallel large eddy simulation code that adopts domain decomposition method has been developed for large‐scale computation of turbulent flows around an arbitrarily shaped body. For the temporal integration of the unsteady incompressible Navier–Stokes equation, fractional 4‐step splitting algorithm is adopted, and for the modelling of small eddies in turbulent flows, the Smagorinsky model is used. For the parallelization of the code, METIS and Message Passing Interface Libraries are used, respectively, to partition the computational domain and to communicate data between processors. To validate the parallel architecture and to estimate its performance, a three‐dimensional laminar driven cavity flow inside a cubical enclosure has been solved. To validate the turbulence calculation, the turbulent channel flows at Re τ = 180 and 1050 are simulated and compared with previous results. Then, a backward facing step flow is solved and compared with a DNS result for overall code validation. Finally, the turbulent flow around MIRA model at Re = 2.6 × 10 6 is simulated by using approximately 6.7 million nodes. Scalability curve obtained from this simulation shows that scalable results are obtained. The calculated drag coefficient agrees better with the experimental result than those previously obtained by using two‐equation turbulence models. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.093
GPT teacher head0.479
Teacher spread0.386 · 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