Bibliographic record
Abstract
The present study revisits the rotating duct problem examined by Polihronov and Straatman (J. Polihronov and A. G. Straatman, Phys. Rev. Lett. v. 109, p. 054504 (2012)). Starting from the general compressible Euler equations in a non-stationary reference frame closed form expressions for velocity, temperature, density and pressure along the duct are determined. The present results are more general than those obtained by Polihronov and Straatman, as the change of in-frame kinetic energy has been retained. The improvement of the present results over Polihronov and Straatman’s is demonstrated by comparison with the results of a computational fluid dynamics study. The new results have been further generalized to the case of a rotating duct with varying cross-sectional area, and again for a general curved passage in three-dimensional space. The work required or derived from the rotating duct has also been computed. The choked flow condition within the passage of varying cross-sectional area has been identified, along with the constraints which must be placed on the Mach, Rossby, and tip Mach numbers to avoid choked flow. Finally, a straightforward technique to identify any locations where an ideal rotating flow in a constrained passage will become sonic has been presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".