A systematic approach for modeling multi-physics systems
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An engineering system may consist of several different types of components, belonging to such physical “domains” as mechanical, electrical, fluid, and thermal. It is termed a multi-domain (or multi-physics) system. In developing an analytical model of a multi-physics system, it is advantageous to use “unified” and “integrated” procedures for formulating different physical domains while including inter-domain dynamic interactions, in a systematic manner that will lead to a “unique” (single) model having physically meaningful variables. Such a model formulation is the focus of the present paper. In this context, a generalized method to incorporate impedance (e.g., the analogous use of mobility in the mechanical domain), exporting the modeling procedures from one domain into a different domain, conversion of a system in one domain into another domain, and realization of an equivalent single-domain model for a multi-domain system are addressed. This knowledge is useful in education, research, and application of multi-physics models of engineering dynamic systems. Illustrative examples are provided to clarify the presented approaches. This paper assumes a knowledge in linear graphs and some background material, as presented in the prior work of the author. The relevant nomenclature is listed at the end of the paper.
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.
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 it