Resolving fluid boundary layers with particle strength exchange and weak adaptivity
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
Most fluid scenarios in graphics have a high Reynolds number, where viscosity is dominated by inertial effects, thus most solvers drop viscosity altogether: numerical damping from coarse grids is generally stronger than physical viscosity while resembling it in character. However, viscosity remains crucial near solid boundaries, in the boundary layer , to a large extent determining the look of the flow as a function of Reynolds number. Typical graphics simulations do not resolve boundary layer dynamics, so their look is determined mostly by numerical errors with the given grid size and time step, rather than physical parameters. We introduce two complementary techniques to capture boundary layer dynamics, bringing more physical control and predictability. We extend the FLIP particle-grid method with viscous particle strength exchange[Rivoalen and Huberson 2001] to better transfer momentum at solid boundaries, dubbed VFLIP. We also introduce Weakly Higher Resolution Regional Projection (WHIRP), a cheap and simple way to increase grid resolution where important by overlaying high resolution grids on the global coarse grid.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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