MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801879350 · doi:10.7508/jmerd.2017.04.001

Analysis of Laminar Flow in a Porous Pipe with Slip Velocity

2017· article· en· W2801879350 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueMechanical Engineering Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaminar flowHomotopy analysis methodSlip (aerodynamics)MechanicsShear stressVector fieldReynolds numberMathematicsSeries (stratigraphy)PorosityGeometryMaterials scienceHomotopyGeotechnical engineeringGeologyPhysicsThermodynamicsTurbulence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this manuscript, we present the semi-numerical solution for laminar flow in a porous pipe with velocity slip. The flow is analyzed by employing Computer extended series method(CES) and Homotopy analysis method(HAM). The primary objective is to study the influence of non-zero tangential slip velocity on the velocity field and shear stress. The convergence region of the obtained solutions are examined by Domb-Sykes plot and h-curve. The validity of the series solution is further extended to a larger value of Reynolds number for different slip coefficients. Finally, we compared the results obtained by the proposed methods, and are presented in the form of graphs. The above methods admits desired accuracy and are validated with the available numerical results.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.172
Threshold uncertainty score0.470

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.266 · 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