MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2295398670 · doi:10.1002/nme.5185

A new technique for numerical simulation of dendritic solidification using a meshfree interface finite element method

2015· article· en· W2295398670 on OpenAlexaff
A. Ghoneim

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMetallurgy and Material Forming
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite element methodDiffuse element methodMeshfree methodsLevel set methodSmoothed finite element methodInterface (matter)Computer scienceExtended finite element methodKronecker deltaAlgorithmApplied mathematicsMathematicsComputational scienceMathematical optimizationBoundary knot methodBubbleBoundary element methodFinite element limit analysisStructural engineeringPhysicsParallel computing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary A new technique for sharp‐interface modeling of dendritic solidification is proposed using a meshfree interface finite element method such that the liquid–solid interface is represented implicitly and allowed to arbitrarily intersect the finite elements. At the interface‐embedded elements, meshfree interface points without connectivity are imposed directly at the zero level set while meshfree interpolants are constructed using radial basis functions. This ensures both the partition of unity and the Kronecker delta properties are satisfied allowing for precise and easy imposition of Dirichlet boundary conditions at the interface. The constructed meshfree interpolants are also used for solving a variational level set equation based on the Ginzburg–Landau energy functional minimization such that reinitialization is completely eliminated and fast marching algorithms for interfacial velocity extension are not necessary resulting in an efficient algorithm with excellent volume conservation. The meshfree interface finite element method is used for modeling dendritic solidification in a pure melt where it is found suitable in handling the complex interfacial dynamics often encountered in dendritic growth. Mathematical formulation and implementation followed by numerical results and analysis will be presented and discussed. Copyright © 2016 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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.357 · 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

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal for Numerical Methods in EngineeringSame topicMetallurgy and Material FormingFrench-language works237,207