MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553684326 · doi:10.5539/jmr.v8n6p1

Augmented Stabilized and Galerkin Least Squares Formulations

2016· article· en· W2553684326 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rakesh Ranjan, Yusheng Feng, Anthony Theodore Chronopolous

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematics Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsGalerkin methodApplied mathematicsLeast-squares function approximationStability (learning theory)Computational fluid dynamicsDivergence (linguistics)CompressibilityAugmented Lagrangian methodFlow (mathematics)Mathematical optimizationFinite element methodGeometryComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We study incompressible fluid flow problems with stabilized formulations. We introduce an iterative penalty approach to satisfying the divergence free constraint in the Streamline Upwind Petrov Galerkin (SUPG) and Galerkin Least Squares (GLS) formulations, and prove the stability of the formulation. Equal order interpolations for both velocities and pressure variables are utilized for solving problems as opposed to div-stable pairs used earlier. Higher order spectral/$hp$ approximations are utilized for solving two dimensional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) problems with the new formulations named as the Augmented SUPS (ASUPS) and Augmented Galerkin Least Squares (AGLS) formulations. Excellent conservation of mass properties are observed for the problem with open boundaries in confined enclosures. Inexact Newton Krylov methods are used as the non-linear solvers of choice for the problems studied. Faithful representations of all fields of interest are obtained for the problems tested.

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)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.282 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematics ResearchSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207