MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2611684207 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2017.326

Assessment and development of the gas kinetic boundary condition for the Boltzmann equation

2017· article· en· W2611684207 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMathematics
TopicGas Dynamics and Kinetic Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhysicsHagen–Poiseuille equationBoltzmann equationBoundary value problemMechanicsSlip (aerodynamics)Kinetic energyKinetic theoryLattice Boltzmann methodsDirect simulation Monte CarloThermalClassical mechanicsThermodynamicsFlow (mathematics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gas–surface interactions play important roles in internal rarefied gas flows, especially in micro-electro-mechanical systems with large surface area to volume ratios. Although great progress has been made to solve the Boltzmann equation, the gas kinetic boundary condition (BC) has not been well studied. Here we assess the accuracy of the Maxwell, Epstein and Cercignani–Lampis BCs, by comparing numerical results of the Boltzmann equation for the Lennard–Jones potential to experimental data on Poiseuille and thermal transpiration flows. The four experiments considered are: Ewart et al. ( J. Fluid Mech. , vol. 584, 2007, pp. 337–356), Rojas-Cárdenas et al. ( Phys. Fluids , vol. 25, 2013, 072002) and Yamaguchi et al. ( J. Fluid Mech. , vol. 744, 2014, pp. 169–182; vol. 795, 2016, pp. 690–707), where the mass flow rates in Poiseuille and thermal transpiration flows are measured. This requires that the BC has the ability to tune the effective viscous and thermal slip coefficients to match the experimental data. Among the three BCs, the Epstein BC has more flexibility to adjust the two slip coefficients, and hence for most of the time it gives good agreement with the experimental measurements. However, like the Maxwell BC, the viscous slip coefficient in the Epstein BC cannot be smaller than unity but the Cercignani–Lampis BC can. Therefore, we propose to combine the Epstein and Cercignani–Lampis BCs to describe gas–surface interaction. Although the new BC contains six free parameters, our approximate analytical expressions for the viscous and thermal slip coefficients provide useful guidance to choose these parameters.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.570
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.283 · 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