MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2990742996 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2019.876

Material spike formation in highly unsteady separated flows

2019· article· en· W2990742996 on OpenAlexaff
Mattia Serra, Seán Crouzat, Gaël Simon, Jérôme Vetel, George Haller

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle Dynamics in Fluid Flows
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpike (software development)MechanicsMaterials scienceComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We apply the recent frame-invariant theory of separation spike formation to complex unsteady flows, including a turbulent separation bubble, an impinging jet, and flows around a freely moving cylinder and a freely rotating ellipse. We show how the theory captures the onset of material spike formation, without any assumption on the flow type (steady, periodic, unsteady) or separation type (on- or off-wall, fixed or moving boundaries). We uncover new phenomena, such as the transition from on-wall to off-wall separation, the merger of initially distinct spikes, and the presence of severe material spikes that remain hidden to previous approaches. Remarkably, even in steady flows around curved boundaries, we detect material spikes in the absence of flow reversal, the main ingredient to existing separation criteria. Together, our results unveil how an involved network of spikes arises, interacts and merges dynamically, leading to the final ejection of particles from the wall in highly transient flow separation processes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fluid MechanicsSame topicParticle Dynamics in Fluid FlowsFrench-language works237,207