MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320964960 · doi:10.2514/6.2013-2511

Results from the Fifth AIAA Drag Prediction Workshop obtained with a parallel Newton-Krylov-Schur flow solver discretized using summation-by-parts operators

2013· article· en· W2320964960 on OpenAlexaff
Michal Osusky, Pieter D. Boom, David W. Zingg

Bibliographic record

Venue31st AIAA Applied Aerodynamics Conference · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolverComputer scienceDragDiscretizationFlow (mathematics)Applied mathematicsMathematical optimizationComputational scienceMathematicsAerospace engineeringMathematical analysisGeometryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present the solution of the test cases from the Fifth AIAA Drag PredictionWorkshop computed with a novel Newton-Krylov-Schur parallel solution algorithm for the Reynolds- Averaged Navier-Stokes equations coupled with the Spalart-Allmaras one-equation turbu- lence model. The algorithm employs summation-by-parts operators on multi-block struc- tured grids, while simultaneous approximation terms are used to enforce boundary condi- tions and coupling at block interfaces. Two-dimensional verification and validation cases highlight the correspondence of the current algorithm to established flow solvers as well as experimental data. The common grid study, using grids with up to 150 million nodes around the NASA Common Research Model wing-body configuration, demonstrates the parallel computation capabilities of the current algorithm, while the buffet study demon- strates the ability of the solver to compute flow with substantial recirculation regions and flow separation. The use of quadratic constitutive relations to modify the Boussinesq ap- proximation is shown to have a significant impact on the recirculation patterns observed at higher angles of attack. The algorithm is capable of efficiently and accurately calculating complex three-dimensional flows over a range of flow conditions, with results consistent with those of well-established flow solvers using the same turbulence model.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.174 · 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

Citations30
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue31st AIAA Applied Aerodynamics ConferenceSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207