MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2183108876 · doi:10.22215/etd/2014-10117

Computational Fluid Dynamic Solver Based on Cellular Discrete-Event Simulation for use in Biological Systems

2014· dissertation· en· W2183108876 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Van Schyndel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicSimulation Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDEVSComputer scienceSolverCellular automatonFluid dynamicsDiscrete event simulationComputational fluid dynamicsFormalism (music)Computational scienceModeling and simulationSimulationAlgorithmEngineeringProgramming languagePhysicsAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The use of computer simulations in biology and the medical research field has gained in popularity. These simulations are providing researchers the opportunity to better predict the behavior of biological systems before performing long and expensive physical trials. The modeling of large biological systems would benefit from a method of approximating fluid flow quickly and accurately. Currently, no analytical solution exists; instead, many different numerical methods attempt to provide accurate approximations. They are referred to as Computational Fluid Dynamic solvers (CFD).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.430
Teacher spread0.320 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSimulation Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207