Approximate analytical solution for ionizing cylindrical shock wave in rotational axisymmetric non-ideal gas: isothermal flow
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The propagation of an ionizing cylindrical shock wave in rotational axisymmetric non-ideal gas under isothermal flow condition with an azimuthal magnetic field is investigated. The electrical conductivity is assumed to be negligible in the medium ahead of the shock wave, which after the passage of the shock wave becomes infinitely large. The magnetic pressure, azimuthal fluid velocity, and axial fluid velocity are assumed to be varying according to the power law with distance from the axis of symmetry in the undisturbed medium. The zeroth and first-order approximations are discussed by the aid of the power series method. Solutions for the zeroth-order approximation are constructed in analytical form. Distributions of hydrodynamical quantities are discussed. The effect of flow parameters, namely, shock wave Cowling number c∗, adiabatic exponent γ, rotational parameter L, and gas non-idealness parameter [Formula: see text] are studied on the flow variables. Due to the consideration of a rotating medium or due to the presence of magnetic field, the total energy of the disturbance increases, while with an increase in adiabatic exponent γ the total energy of the disturbance decreases. Density and pressure vanish near the axis of symmetry, thus forming a vacuum there.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".