An error estimator for transmitting boundary conditions in fluid-structure interaction problems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper proposes error estimators to validate Transmitting Boundary Conditions (TBCs) in fluid-structure interaction problems. The error estimators are based on a new formulation of the dynamic response of fluid-structure systems including TBCs. The mathematical background is briefly discussed and the obtained equations are solved numerically to assess the accuracy of a given TBC and determine the associated error independently of FEM or BEM modeling of the fluid domain. The error estimators take account of : (i) structure's flexibility, (ii) fluid compressibility, (iii) energy dissipation at fluid boundaries, (iv) fluid domain truncation length, and (v) excitation frequency. An illustrative example consisting of a dam-reservoir system is presented where an error estimator is used to evaluate the effects of various TBCs on the hydrodynamic pressure acting on the dam upstream face. The proposed formulation can be programmed easily and used efficiently for rigorous assessment of classical or newly-developed TBCs for vibrating fluid-structure systems.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it