Interaction of a pair of ferrofluid drops in a rotating magnetic field
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We use two-dimensional numerical simulation to study the interaction between a pair of ferrofluid drops suspended in a rotating uniform magnetic field. Numerical results show four distinct regimes over the range of parameters tested: independent spin, planetary motion, drop locking and direct coalescence. These are in qualitative agreement with experiments, and the transition between them can be understood from the competition between magnetophoretic forces and viscous drag. We further analyse in detail the planetary motion, i.e. the revolution of the drops around each other while each spins in phase with the external magnetic field. For drops, as opposed to solid microspheres, the interaction is dominated by viscous sweeping, a form of hydrodynamic interaction. Magnetic dipole–dipole interaction via mutual induction only plays a secondary role. This insight helps us explain novel features of the planetary revolution of the ferrofluid drops that cannot be explained by a dipole model, including the increase of the angular velocity of planetary motion with the rotational rate of the external field, and the attainment of a limit separation between the drops that is independent of the initial separation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it