MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226342967 · doi:10.1063/5.0078418

Flexible cylinder flow-induced vibration

2022· article· en· W4226342967 on OpenAlexafffund
Leixin Ma, Ke Lin, Dixia Fan, Jiasong Wang, Michael Triantafyllou

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysics of Fluids · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersQueen's UniversityWestlake University
KeywordsPhysicsWakeCylinderVibrationArtificial neural networkVortex-induced vibrationVortex sheddingFlow (mathematics)VortexFluid–structure interactionMechanical engineeringArtificial intelligenceMechanicsTurbulenceAcousticsComputer scienceEngineeringFinite element methodReynolds number

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we conducted a selective review on the recent progress in physics insight and modeling of flexible cylinder flow-induced vibrations (FIVs). FIVs of circular cylinders include vortex-induced vibrations (VIVs) and wake-induced vibrations (WIVs), and they have been the center of the fluid-structure interaction (FSI) research in the past several decades due to the rich physics and the engineering significance. First, we summarized the new understanding of the structural response, hydrodynamics, and the impact of key structural properties for both the isolated and multiple circular cylinders. The complex FSI phenomena observed in experiments and numerical simulations are explained carefully via the analysis of the vortical wake topology. Following up with several critical future questions to address, we discussed the advancement of the artificial intelligent and machine learning (AI/ML) techniques in improving both the understanding and modeling of flexible cylinder FIVs. Though in the early stages, several AL/ML techniques have shown success, including auto-identification of key VIV features, physics-informed neural network in solving inverse problems, Gaussian process regression for automatic and adaptive VIV experiments, and multi-fidelity modeling in improving the prediction accuracy and quantifying the prediction uncertainties. These preliminary yet promising results have demonstrated both the opportunities and challenges for understanding and modeling of flexible cylinder FIVs in today's big data era.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 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

Citations66
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysics of FluidsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207