MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2976065335 · doi:10.1299/jsmehs.2019.56.e022

Interaction between supersonic flow and DC discharge plasma generated on a flat plate airfoil

2019· article· en· W2976065335 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ryota TOKUTAKE, Naoya Kanzaki, Wataru Takahashi, Kazumi TSUNODA

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Proceedings of Conference of Hokuriku-Shinetsu Branch · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPlasma and Flow Control in Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSupersonic speedAirfoilShock wavePlasmaMach numberMechanicsOblique shockSupersonic wind tunnelPlasma actuatorShock (circulatory)Materials scienceOpticsPhysicsDielectric barrier discharge

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the experimental results of the effects of the DC discharge plasma generated on the flat airfoil in a supersonic airflow. The experiments were conducted in an indraft supersonic wind tunnel installed with the Laval nozzle. The DC discharge plasma was generated between a pair of electrodes mounted on the flat airfoil surface. Current and voltage measurements indicated that the plasma was generated at low power consumption but became unstable discharge. From the visualization image of the flow field, the oblique shock wave at the leading edge of the airfoil was observed. Moreover a slight increase in the angle of shock wave was seen when the plasma was generated. This tendency shows that a Mach number near the leading edge decreased due to the generation of the plasma. To clarify the effects of the plasma on the supersonic airflow, total pressure distributions were also measured. We found that the total pressure near the plasma discharge might be higher than without discharge. It was suggested that an enthalpy elevation owing to the discharge led to the increase in the total pressure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Proceedings of Conference of Hokuriku-Shinetsu BranchSame topicPlasma and Flow Control in AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207