MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2317401531 · doi:10.2514/6.2005-116

The Rectangular Wall Jet - Part II: Role of the Large-Scale Structures

2005· article· en· W2317401531 on OpenAlexafffund
Joseph W. Hall, D. Ewing

Bibliographic record

Venue43rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsJet (fluid)Scale (ratio)MechanicsMaterials scienceComputer scienceAerospace engineeringPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of the large-scale vortical structures in the three-dimensional turbulent wall jet formed by a rectangular channel with aspect ratio of Ar = 4 was investigated using measurements of the fluctuating wall pressure and the turbulent velocity field in the near and intermediate regions. Contours of the turbulence intensity and one component of the mean streamwise vorticity on either side of the jet centreline indicate that there are two regions of counter-rotating mean vorticity associated with the edges of the lateral shear layers that cause the mean flow to be driven down and outward. The inner vortices remain at approximately the same lateral position as the flow evolves downstream, while the outer regions move away from the wall and outward. The application of the proper orthogonal decomposition (POD) to the fluctuating pressure measurements and a temporal reconstruction revealed that the majority the flow energy was approximately equally divided between an symmetric and an antisymmetric mode. Pressure velocity correlations reveal that the passage of the coherent structure is more complicated that earlier models of this flow would suggest.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.154
Threshold uncertainty score0.710

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations2
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue43rd AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and ExhibitSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207