MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207953279 · doi:10.1103/physreve.104.045101

Smallest scale of wrinkles of a Huygens front in extremely strong turbulence

2021· article· en· W3207953279 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Vladimir Sabelnikov, Andrei N. Lipatnikov, A. I. Troshin

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. E · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersOffice National d'études et de Recherches AérospatialesMinistry of Education and Science of the Russian FederationCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of Canada
KeywordsTurbulenceHomogeneous isotropic turbulenceFront (military)FractalLength scalePhysicsScale (ratio)IsotropyAdvectionGeometryIntermittencyConstant (computer programming)DissipationMathematicsMechanicsMathematical analysisOpticsDirect numerical simulationMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By analyzing the statistically stationary stage of propagation of a Huygens front in homogeneous, isotropic, constant-density turbulence, a length scale l_{0} is introduced to characterize the smallest wrinkles on the front surface in the case of a low constant speed u_{0} of the front when compared to the Kolmogorov velocity u_{K}. The length scale is derived following a hypothesis of dynamical similarity that highlights a balance between (i) creation of a front area due to advection and (ii) destruction of the front area due to propagation. Consequently, the front speed is compared with the magnitude of the fluid velocity difference in two points separated by a distance smaller than the Kolmogorov length scale. Appropriateness of the smallest wrinkle scale is demonstrated by applying a fractal approach to evaluating the mean area of the instantaneous front surface. Since the scales of the smallest and larger wrinkles belong to different subranges (dissipation and inertial, respectively) of the Kolmogorov turbulence spectrum, the front is hypothesized to be a bifractal characterized by two different fractal dimensions in the two subranges. Both fractal dimensions are evaluated adapting the aforementioned hypothesis of dynamical similarity. Such a bifractal model yields a linear relation between the mean fluid consumption velocity, which is equal to the front speed u_{0} multiplied with a ratio of the mean area of the instantaneous front surface to the transverse projected area, and the rms turbulent velocity u^{'} even if a ratio of u_{0}/u^{'} tends to zero.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score0.455

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. ESame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207