MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3084086717 · doi:10.1063/5.0030137

Assessment of unsteady flow predictions using hybrid deep learning based reduced-order models

2021· preprint· en· W3084086717 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicModel Reduction and Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Research Foundation Singapore
KeywordsComputer scienceAlgorithmAutoencoderFlow (mathematics)Recurrent neural networkSolverDeep learningApplied mathematicsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceArtificial neural networkMathematical optimizationGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present two deep learning-based hybrid data-driven reduced-order models for prediction of unsteady fluid flows. These hybrid models rely on recurrent neural networks (RNNs) to evolve low-dimensional states of unsteady fluid flow. The first model projects the high-fidelity time series data from a finite element Navier–Stokes solver to a low-dimensional subspace via proper orthogonal decomposition (POD). The time-dependent coefficients in the POD subspace are propagated by the recurrent net (closed-loop encoder–decoder updates) and mapped to a high-dimensional state via the mean flow field and the POD basis vectors. This model is referred to as POD-RNN. The second model, referred to as the convolution recurrent autoencoder network (CRAN), employs convolutional neural networks (instead of POD) as layers of linear kernels with nonlinear activations, to extract low-dimensional features from flow field snapshots. The flattened features are advanced using a recurrent (closed-loop manner) net and up-sampled (transpose convoluted) gradually to high-dimensional snapshots. Two benchmark problems of the flow past a cylinder and the flow past side-by-side cylinders are selected as the unsteady flow problems to assess the efficacy of these models. For the problem of the flow past a single cylinder, the performance of both the models is satisfactory and the CRAN model is found to be overkill. However, the CRAN model completely outperforms the POD-RNN model for a more complicated problem of the flow past side-by-side cylinders involving the complex effects of vortex-to-vortex and gap flow interactions. Owing to the scalability of the CRAN model, we introduce an observer-corrector method for calculation of integrated pressure force coefficients on the fluid–solid boundary on a reference grid. This reference grid, typically a structured and uniform grid, is used to interpolate scattered high-dimensional field data as snapshot images. These input images are convenient in training the CRAN model, which motivates us to further explore the application of the CRAN-based models for prediction of fluid flows.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.827
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.263 · 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