A comparative study of heat transfer analysis of fractional Maxwell fluid by using Caputo and Caputo–Fabrizio derivatives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comparative analysis is carried out to study the unsteady flow of a Maxwell fluid in the presence of Newtonian heating near a vertical flat plate. The fractional derivatives presented by Caputo and Caputo–Fabrizio are applied to make a physical model for a Maxwell fluid. Exact solutions of the non-dimensional temperature and velocity fields for Caputo and Caputo–Fabrizio time-fractional derivatives are determined via the Laplace transform technique. Numerical solutions of partial differential equations are obtained by employing Tzou’s and Stehfest’s algorithms to compare the results of both models. Exact solutions with integer-order derivative (fractional parameter α = 1) are also obtained for both temperature and velocity distributions as a special case. A graphical illustration is made to discuss the effect of Prandtl number Pr and time t on the temperature field. Similarly, the effects of Maxwell fluid parameter λ and other flow parameters on the velocity field are presented graphically, as well as in tabular form.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".