Lagrangian Strain- and Rotation-Rate Tensor Evaluation Based on Multi-pulse Particle Tracking Velocimetry (MPTV) and Radial Basis Functions(RBFs)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Physical conservation laws are inherently Lagrangian. However, analyses in fluid mechanics using the Lagrangian framework are often forgone in favor of those using the Eulerian framework. This is perhaps due to a lack of experimental techniques with high temporal and spatial resolution that track the movement of fluid tracers in a flow domain. The development of time-resolved Particle Tracking Velocimetry/Accelerometry (TR-PTV/A) that measures flows with high seeding density has made the use of the Lagrangian framework more accessible. A challenge facing PTV/A is the need for robust mesh-free numerical schemes that handle random particle locations. Such a scheme can be created with high-order accuracy using Radial Basis Functions (RBFs). RBFs allow direct evaluation of derivatives of vector and scalar fields at random locations with infinite-order smoothness. The current work uses RBF-based differential schemes to develop a post-processing tool for PTV/A data, which can accurately evaluate spatial derivatives directly from Lagrangian particle tracks. This RBF-based strain/rotation-rate tensor evaluation tool is validated with two and three-dimensional flows from analytical solutions and is then tested with experimental data measured by a multi-pulse PTV/A system.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".