MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038018042 · doi:10.1119/1.1524162

Bernoulli levitation

2003· article· en· W3038018042 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Waltham, Sarah Bendall, A. Kotlicki

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Physics · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicExperimental and Theoretical Physics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLevitationPhysicsBernoulli's principleClassical mechanicsFluid mechanicsMagnetic levitationBasis (linear algebra)MechanicsTheoretical physicsThermodynamicsQuantum mechanicsGeometryMagnetMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bernoulli levitation is the basis of many popular counter-intuitive physics demonstrations. However, few of these lend themselves to a quantitative description without recourse to computational fluid dynamics. Levitation of a flat plate is the exception, and we present an analysis that illustrates several principles of fluid mechanics in a pedagogically useful way.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.006

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations36
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PhysicsSame topicExperimental and Theoretical Physics StudiesFrench-language works237,207