MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768928791 · doi:10.5194/gmd-2017-272

Comparison of dealiasing schemes in large-eddy simulation of neutrally-stratified atmospheric boundary-layer type flows

2017· article· en· W2768928791 on OpenAlexaff
Fabien Margairaz, Marco G. Giometto, M. B. Parlange, Marc Calaf

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCenter for High Performance ComputingSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungUniversity of Utah
KeywordsFourier seriesTruncation errorLarge eddy simulationFourier transformSmoothingMathematicsTurbulence modelingTruncation (statistics)Fourier analysisDiscrete Fourier seriesMathematical analysisTurbulenceApplied mathematicsPhysicsMechanicsShort-time Fourier transformStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Three dealiasing schemes for large-eddy simulation of turbulent flows are inter-compared for the canonical case of pressure-drive atmospheric boundary-layer type flows. Aliasing errors arise in the multiplication of partial sums, such as those encountered when integrating the non-linear terms of the Navier–Stokes equations in spectral methods (Fourier or polynomial discrete series), and are detrimental to the accuracy of the numerical solution. This is of special relevance when using high-order schemes. In this work, a performance/cost analysis is developed for three well-accepted approaches: the exact 3/2 rule, the Fourier truncation method, and a high order Fourier smoothing method. Tests are performed within a newly developed mixed pseudo-spectral collocation - finite differences large-eddy simulation code, parallelized using a two-dimensional pencil decomposition. The static Smagorinsky eddy-viscosity model with wall damping of the model coefficient is used. A series of simulations are performed at varying resolution and key flow statistics are inter-compared among the considered dealiasing schemes. The numerical results validate the numerical performance predicted by theory when using the Fourier truncation and Fourier smoothing methods. In terms of turbulence statistics, the Fourier Truncation method proves to be over-dissipative when compared against the Fourier Smoothing method and the traditional 3/2-rule, leading to an enhanced horizontal integrated mass flux and to higher dispersive momentum fluxes. Its use in large-eddy simulation of atmospheric boundary-layer type flows is therefore not recommended. Conversely, the Fourier Smoothing method yields accurate flow statistics, comparable to those resulting from the application of the 3/2 rule, with a significant reduction in computational cost, which makes it a convenient alternative for use in the studies related to the atmospheric boundary layer.

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)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.295 · 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
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207