Adjoint State of Nonlinear Vortex-Lattice Method for Aerodynamic Design and Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adjoint state of a nonlinear vortex-lattice method, coupled with sectional polars obtained with an infinite swept-wing (2.5D) Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) solver, is presented as an interactive method for preliminary aerodynamic design and control of moderate-to-high aspect ratio wings in subsonic and transonic flows. First, the nonlinear vortex-lattice method is described, augmented with a Prandtl–Glauert compressibility correction and regularized so that poststall solutions can be recovered. The linearization of the coupled system of equations is formulated using a Newton method, and the adjoint state is obtained for lift, drag, and inverse design functionals. Numerical results show that the aerodynamic model approximates well the forces predicted by three-dimensional (3D) RANS simulations for the Common Research Model wing, and that the adjoint-state gradients agree well with finite difference tests for a plethora of test cases. More interesting examples are shown, ranging from the optimal unstalling of wings to the assimilation of 3D RANS data into the present model, as well as its ability to extrapolate.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".