Bibliographic record
Abstract
Results from direct numerical simulations of an unsteady turbulent shear layer with a free surface are presented. The emphasis is on the interaction dynamics of the free surface with the coherent vortices in the underlying turbulent shear flow as well as the resulting free-surface signatures. Instantaneous vortex lines and isosurfaces of enstrophy indicate that coherent horseshoe vortical structures emerge from the random initial vorticity field. These horseshoe vortices impinge, break and reconnect onto the free surface, and then appear as two vortex connections with opposite signs on the surface. The two identified vortical structures correspond to ‘splatting’ and ‘swirling’ events, which have been observed in other experiments and simulations of free-surface/turbulence flows. Though free-surface depressions form near the vertical-vorticity centres in the connection processes, only a low correlation (≈50% to 60%) is found between the free-surface roughness (vertical deformation) and the connected normal vorticity. On the other hand, the free-surface curvatures and the tangential free-surface vorticities are better correlated (≈80% to 90%). The balance of enstrophy and the vorticity transport show that stretching and viscous dissipation along the direction of the vorticity vector dominate the vortex dynamics near the free surface. These two transport mechanisms are found to be responsible for the cancellation of the spanwise vorticity of the horseshoe-vortex heads and the annihilation of the surface-connected normal vorticities.
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) | 1.000 | 1.000 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".