Multiscale flow characteristics of droplet spreading with microgravity conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, mesoscopic lattice–Boltzmann method (LBM) and microscopic molecular dynamics simulation method were used to simulate droplet dynamic wetting under microgravity. In terms of LBM, the wetting process of a droplet on a solid wall surface was simulated by introducing the fluid–fluid and solid–fluid interactions. In terms of molecular dynamics simulation, the spreading process of water on gold surface was simulated. Calculation results showed that two kinds of calculation methods were based on the microscopic molecular theory or mesoscopic kinetics theory, and such models could effectively overcome the contact line paradox issue, which results from the macro-continuum assumption and non-slip boundary condition assumption. The spreading exhibits two-stage behavior: fast spreading and slow spreading stages. For the two simulation methods, the ratio of fast spreading stage duration to slow spreading duration, spreading capacity (equilibrium contact radius/initial radius), and the spreading exponent of the rapid stage were very close. However, the predictive spreading index of the slow spreading stage was different, owing to the different spreading mechanisms between meso- and nanoscales.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".