Primal‐Dual Optimization for Fluids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We apply a novel optimization scheme from the image processing and machine learning areas, a fast Primal‐Dual method, to achieve controllable and realistic fluid simulations. While our method is generally applicable to many problems in fluid simulations, we focus on the two topics of fluid guiding and separating solid‐wall boundary conditions. Each problem is posed as an optimization problem and solved using our method, which contains acceleration schemes tailored to each problem. In fluid guiding, we are interested in partially guiding fluid motion to exert control while preserving fluid characteristics. With our method, we achieve explicit control over both large‐scale motions and small‐scale details which is valuable for many applications, such as level‐of‐detail adjustment (after running the coarse simulation), spatially varying guiding strength, domain modification, and resimulation with different fluid parameters. For the separating solid‐wall boundary conditions problem, our method effectively eliminates unrealistic artefacts of fluid crawling up solid walls and sticking to ceilings, requiring few changes to existing implementations. We demonstrate the fast convergence of our Primal‐Dual method with a variety of test cases for both model problems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".