MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802686177 · doi:10.2514/1.j056704

Nonlinear Frequency-Domain Solver for Vortex Lattice Method

2018· article· en· W2802686177 on OpenAlexaff
Matthieu Parenteau, Éric Laurendeau

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSolverVortexFrequency domainNonlinear systemLattice (music)Spectral methodFourier transformWakePhysicsMathematical analysisMathematicsMechanicsMathematical optimizationAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This Paper presents a nonlinear frequency-domain solver for the vortex lattice method. Assuming a periodic solution, the wing circulation is represented in time by a Fourier series without the assumption of small-amplitude oscillations and with a prescribed wake. The linear system of the vortex lattice method is developed in the frequency domain, allowing the periodic solution to be formulated as a steady problem. Two different approaches are proposed to solve the nonlinear system of equations, an iterative segregated approach and a direct frequency-domain approach. The method is verified against two-dimensional Theordorsen theory as well as three-dimensional solutions from the doublet lattice method and the time-domain unsteady vortex lattice method. The spectral accuracy of the method is demonstrated as is its capabilities of capturing nonlinear effects from wake intersections. The resulting time-spectral vortex lattice method solver is computationally efficient with precision comparable to the time-domain unsteady vortex lattice method solver, thus making the approach interesting for aerospace applications.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations14
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA JournalSame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207