MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803857192 · doi:10.2514/6.2018-4263

Temporal Stabilisation of Flux Reconstruction on Linear Problems

2018· preprint· en· W2803857192 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Will Trojak, Rob Watson, Paul G. Tucker

Bibliographic record

Venue2018 Fluid Dynamics Conference · 2018
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilQueen's UniversityQueen's University Belfast
KeywordsFilter (signal processing)TurbulenceLarge eddy simulationDissipationFlux (metallurgy)Domain (mathematical analysis)Reynolds numberMechanicsMathematicsControl theory (sociology)Applied mathematicsComputer scienceAlgorithmPhysicsMathematical analysisMaterials scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Filtering is often used in Large Eddy Simulation with a global filter width, instead here a filter width in the reference domain of high order Flux Reconstruction is considered. It is shown via Von Neumann analysis how filtering effects the dispersion and dissipation of the scheme when spatially and temporally discretised. With it being shown that filtering stabilises the scheme temporally by upto $25\%$ for forth order FR. The impact of filtering on error production is calculated, highlighting the reduction in convective velocity caused and showing numerically the impact on order of accuracy. Finally, the turbulent Taylor-Green case is used to understand the effect of reference domain filtering on the transition to turbulence, and a filter Reynolds number is defined that is shown to be useful in understanding the effect of filtering on simulations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2018 Fluid Dynamics ConferenceSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207