MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3101376386

New method for detecting singularities in experimental incompressible flows

2017· article· en· W3101376386 on OpenAlexaff
Denis Kuzzay, Ewe-Wei Saw, Fabio J. W. A. Martins, Davide Faranda, Jean-Marc Foucaut, F. Daviaud, B. Dubrulle

Bibliographic record

VenueLillOA (Université de Lille (University Of Lille)) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGravitational singularityMathematicsReynolds numberVorticityVector fieldSingularityMathematical analysisGeometryNonlinear systemBoundary (topology)VortexFlow (mathematics)Plane (geometry)Particle image velocimetryWind tunnelMechanicsPhysicsTurbulence
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We introduce two new singularity detection criteria based on the work of Duchon-Robert (DR) [J. Duchon and R. Robert, Nonlinearity, 13, 249 (2000)], and Eyink [G.L. Eyink, Phys. Rev. E, 74 (2006)] which allow for the local detection of singularities with scaling exponent h⩽1/2h⩽1/2h\leqslant1/2 in experimental flows, using PIV measurements. We show that in order to detect such singularities, one does not need to have access to the whole velocity field inside a volume but can instead look for them from stereoscopic particle image velocimetry (SPIV) data on a plane. We discuss the link with the Beale-Kato-Majda (BKM) [J.T. Beale, T. Kato, A. Majda, Commun. Math. Phys., 94, 61 (1984)] criterion, based on the blowup of vorticity, which applies to singularities of Navier-Stokes equations. We illustrate our discussion using tomographic PIV data obtained inside a high Reynolds number flow generated inside the boundary layer of a wind tunnel. In such a case, BKM and DR criteria are well correlated with each other.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLillOA (Université de Lille (University Of Lille))Same topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207