MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146414618 · doi:10.1080/10618560600638114

An adjoint method for the calculation of remote sensitivities in supersonic flow

2006· article· en· W2146414618 on OpenAlexaff
Siva Nadarajah, Antony Jameson, Juan J. Alonso

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of computational fluid dynamics · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersAir Force Office of Scientific Research
KeywordsAdjoint equationDiscretizationSupersonic speedChoked flowBoundary (topology)Inverse problemInverseMathematicsBoundary value problemFlow (mathematics)Domain (mathematical analysis)Applied mathematicsDragDirectional derivativeSensitivity (control systems)Mathematical analysisMathematical optimizationGeometryMechanicsPhysicsPartial differential equation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an adjoint method for the calculation of remote sensitivities in supersonic flow. The goal is to develop a set of discrete adjoint equations and their corresponding boundary conditions in order to quantify the influence of geometry modifications on the pressure distribution at an arbitrary location within the domain of interest. First, this paper presents the complete formulation and discretization of the discrete adjoint equations. The special treatment of the adjoint boundary condition to obtain remote sensitivities or sensitivities of pressure distributions at points remotely located from the wing surface are discussed. Secondly, we present results that demonstrate the application of the theory to a three-dimensional remote inverse design problem using a low sweep biconvex wing and a highly swept blunt leading edge wing. Lastly, we present results that establish the added benefit of using an objective function that contains the sum of the remote inverse and drag minimization cost functions.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations9
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of computational fluid dynamicsSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207