MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2170126882 · doi:10.1002/fld.1799

Free surface tracking with polynomial reconstruction and error correction

2008· article· en· W2170126882 on OpenAlexaff
Hyoseob Kim, Byung Soon Jung, Kevin R. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Fluids · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersKookmin University
KeywordsVolume of fluid methodMathematicsPolynomialProjection (relational algebra)Matrix (chemical analysis)Mathematical analysisFinite volume methodFree surfaceFlow (mathematics)GeometryAlgorithmPhysicsMechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A non‐linear method, PREC, for computation of the movement of a free surface is proposed here. The method is composed of three steps: identifying the free surface by using a non‐linear function from the volume fraction matrix, updating the volume fraction matrix using a volume projection method with error correction, and treatment of the results using overshooting or undershooting. Identification of the free surface includes using a polynomial function with 2, 4, or 8 coefficients for one‐, two‐, or three‐dimensional problems, respectively. The polynomial reconstruction involves non‐negligible numerical error. The second advection step includes a linear projection method in space and time. Advection of the volume fraction matrix is computed from the occupying volume of the mesh at the previous time step. At the new time step, the error at each grid point is assumed to be similar to the error at the previous time step and is used for correction. Overshooting or undershooting develops around the free surface mesh points due to the solution's finite time increment. The third step includes truncating the numerical overshooting or undershooting volumes, i.e. isotropic spreading of the excess fluid volumes. The PREC method is evaluated for a one‐dimensional flow case and several two‐dimensional simple flow cases with circular sections (cases include transition parallel to a coordinate, transition with an intersection angle to a coordinate, and rotation). The results from the present method are compared with analytical solutions and results from a donor‐cell VOF method. As a result of these comparisons, the PREC method is validated. Copyright © 2008 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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.812
Threshold uncertainty score0.462

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in FluidsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Heat TransferFrench-language works237,207