MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329128548 · doi:10.2514/6.2012-5447

Two-Level Free-Form Deformation for High-Fidelity Aerodynamic Shape Optimization

2012· article· en· W2329128548 on OpenAlexafffund
Hugo Gagnon, David W. Zingg

Bibliographic record

Venue12th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Conference and 14th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization Conference · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les TechnologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsFree-form deformationAerodynamicsDeformation (meteorology)MorphingFree formComputer scienceShape optimizationStructural engineeringMaterials scienceMechanicsPhysicsEngineeringComputer graphics (images)Composite materialFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ag eneral and unif ied geometry framework based on non-uniform rational B-splines is presented. One key aspect of this framework is the use of free-form deformation where the control points defining the geometry itself are embedded rather than the usual surface grid points. This ensures that one maintains an analytical representation of the geometry as it deforms and, if required, also enables the use of an integrated algorithm for mesh movement. The flexibility and robustness of the proposed approach are demonstrated in the context of aerodynamic shape optimization by maximizing, using an Euler-based flow solver and gradient-based optimizer, the lift-to-drag ratio of an initially half-sphere-shaped geometry. Sensitivities are computed analytically via the discrete adjoint method.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations33
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue12th AIAA Aviation Technology, Integration, and Operations (ATIO) Conference and 14th AIAA/ISSMO Multidisciplinary Analysis and Optimization ConferenceSame topicAdvanced Numerical Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207