MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2335497690 · doi:10.2514/6.2009-369

A Continuous Lagrangian Sensitivity Equation Method for Incompressible Flow

2009· article· en· W2335497690 on OpenAlexaff
Lise Charlot, Stéphane Étienne, Dominique Pelletier

Bibliographic record

Venue47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace Exposition · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Incompressible flowLagrangianCompressibilityFlow (mathematics)Computer scienceApplied mathematicsMathematicsMechanicsPhysicsEngineeringElectronic engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A continuous Lagrangian sensitivity equation method (CLSEM) is presented as a cost effective alternative to the continuous (Eulerian) sensitivity equation method (CESEM) in the case of shape parameters. Boundary conditions for the CLSEM are simpler than those of the CESEM. However a mapping must be introduced to relate the undeformed and deformed configurations thus making the PDEs more complicated. We propose the use of pseudo-elasticity equations to provide a general framework to generate this mapping for unstructured meshes on complex geometries. The methodology is presented in details for the incompressible Navier-Stokes and sensitivity equations in variational form. The PDEs are solved with an adaptive FEM. Sensitivity data obtained with both approaches for a flow around a NACA 4512 are used to obtain estimates of flows around nearby geometries. Results indicate that the CLSEM produces significant improvements in terms of both accuracy and CPU time.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.269
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue47th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting including The New Horizons Forum and Aerospace ExpositionSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207