MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319325250 · doi:10.2514/6.2013-3086

Efficient computation of the finite-time Lyapunov exponent

2013· article· en· W2319325250 on OpenAlexafffund
Philippe Miron, Jérôme Vetel, André Garon

Bibliographic record

Venue21st AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics Conference · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLyapunov exponentComputationExponentComputer scienceStatistical physicsPhysicsAlgorithmArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The finite-time Lyapunov exponent (FTLE) is extensively used as a criterion to reveal fluid flow structures, including unsteady separation/attachment surfaces and vortices, in laminar and turbulent flows. However, for large and complex problems, flow structure identification demands computational methodologies that are more accurate and effective. With this objective in mind, we propose a new set of ordinary differential equations to compute the flow map, along with its first (gradient) and second order (Hessian) spatial derivatives. We show empirically that the gradient of the flow map computed in this way improves the pointwise accuracy of the FTLE field. Furthermore, the Hessian allows for simple interpolation error estimation of the flow map, and the construction of a continuous optimal and multiscale L metric. The Lagrangian particles, or nodes, are then iteratively adapted on the flow structures revealed by this metric. It is found that Lagrangian Coherent Structures are best revealed with the minimum number of vertices with the L∞ metric.

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)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.178 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue21st AIAA Computational Fluid Dynamics ConferenceSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207