MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2477260716 · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511616709.004

Some useful basic ideas

2004· book-chapter· en· W2477260716 on OpenAlexaff
E. M. Greitzer, C. S. Tan, M. B. Graf

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2004
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid dynamics and aerodynamics studies
Canadian institutionsMaRS
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction This chapter introduces a variety of basic ideas encountered in analysis of internal flow problems. These concepts are not only useful in their own right but they also underpin material which appears later in the book. The chapter starts with a discussion of conditions under which a given flow can be regarded as incompressible. If these conditions are met, the thermodynamics have no effect on the dynamics and significant simplifications occur in the description of the motion. The nature and magnitude of upstream influence, i.e. the upstream effect of a downstream component in a fluid system, is next examined. A simple analysis is developed to determine the spatial extent of such influence and hence the conditions under which components in an internal flow system are strongly coupled. Many flows of interest cannot be regarded as incompressible so that effects associated with compressibility must be addressed. We therefore introduce several compressible flow phenomena including one-dimensional channel flow, mass flow restriction (“choking”) at a geometric throat, and shock waves. The last of these topics is developed first from a control volume perspective and then through a more detailed analysis of the internal shock structure to show how entropy creation occurs within the control volume. The integral forms of the equations of motion, utilized in a control volume formulation, provide a powerful tool for obtaining an overall description of many internal flow configurations. A number of situations are analyzed to show their application. These examples also serve as modules for building descriptions of more complex devices.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.007
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0470.018

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 head0.163
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicFluid dynamics and aerodynamics studiesFrench-language works237,207