MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3041836944 · doi:10.1063/5.0018914

Rayleigh–Taylor instability in porous media under sinusoidal time-dependent flow displacements

2020· article· en· W3041836944 on OpenAlexafffund
Youssef Elgahawy, Jalel Azaiez

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP Advances · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicEnhanced Oil Recovery Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInstabilityAmplitudeMechanicsRayleigh–Taylor instabilityViscosityFlow (mathematics)Porous mediumConstant (computer programming)Flow velocityPhysicsThermodynamicsChemistryMaterials sciencePorosityOpticsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Linear stability analysis and nonlinear simulations have been carried out to analyze the Rayleigh–Taylor instability in homogeneous porous media under time-dependent flow displacements. The flow processes consist of a sinusoidal time-dependent velocity characterized by its period (T) and amplitude (Γ) and ensure that the same amount of fluid is injected over a full flow period. A new, more efficient approach to determine instability characteristics has been developed for the stability analysis of these time-dependent injection flows and showed a growth rate that varies in time like the displacement velocity. The effects of the period T and amplitude Γ as well as the fluids’ viscosity (R) and density differences (ΔG) have been analyzed. Consistent with constant injection displacements, a larger ΔG leads to stronger instabilities. Furthermore, it is found that a larger R tends to attenuate the instability during extraction and soaking periods and to enhance it during injection. This study also revealed that for a given total injection time, the time-dependent flow can be less or more unstable than its constant injection counterpart. In particular, for Γ < −1, larger periods lead to stronger instabilities with longer more developed fingers. For Γ > 1, on the other hand, it is found that larger periods tend to attenuate the instability resulting in a smaller number of fingers and a more diffused front. Flows with unit amplitude (Γ = 1) exhibit the same qualitative trends as but are overall more unstable than their counterparts with Γ > 1.

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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations16
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP AdvancesSame topicEnhanced Oil Recovery TechniquesFrench-language works237,207