MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154201290 · doi:10.1051/m2an/2021016

Construction of a low Mach finite volume scheme for the isentropic Euler system with porosity

2021· article· en· W3154201290 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Dellacherie, Jonathan Jung, Pascal Omnès

Bibliographic record

VenueESAIM Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicComputational Fluid Dynamics and Aerodynamics
Canadian institutionsHydro-Québec
FundersUniversité de BordeauxCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsMach numberMathematicsFinite volume methodGodunov's schemeEuler equationsEuler systemPorosityMach reflectionGeometryMathematical analysisCompressible flowCartesian coordinate systemCompressibilityMach waveMechanicsNumerical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classical finite volume schemes for the Euler system are not accurate at low Mach number and some fixes have to be used and were developed in a vast literature over the last two decades. The question we are interested in in this article is: What about if the porosity is no longer uniform? We first show that this problem may be understood on the linear wave equation taking into account porosity. We explain the influence of the cell geometry on the accuracy property at low Mach number. In the triangular case, the stationary space of the Godunov scheme approaches well enough the continuous space of constant pressure and divergence-free velocity, while this is not the case in the Cartesian case. On Cartesian meshes, a fix is proposed and accuracy at low Mach number is proved to be recovered. Based on the linear study, a numerical scheme and a low Mach fix for the non-linear system, with a non-conservative source term due to the porosity variations, is proposed and tested.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESAIM Mathematical Modelling and Numerical AnalysisSame topicComputational Fluid Dynamics and AerodynamicsFrench-language works237,207