MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4229366742 · doi:10.1098/rsta.2021.0057

Editorial: Mathematical problems in physical fluid dynamics: part II

2022· editorial· en· W4229366742 on OpenAlexaff
David Goluskin, Bartosz Protas, Jean‐Luc Thiffeault

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · 2022
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheme (computing)Computer scienceMathematical modelFluid dynamicsManagement sciencePhysical scienceStability (learning theory)Dynamical systems theoryCalculus (dental)MathematicsPhysicsMechanicsMathematics education

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fluid dynamics is a research area lying at the crossroads of physics and applied mathematics with an ever-expanding range of applications in natural sciences and engineering. However, despite decades of concerted research efforts, this area abounds with many fundamental questions that still remain unanswered. At the heart of these problems often lie mathematical models, usually in the form of partial differential equations, and many of the open questions concern the validity of these models and what can be learned from them about the physical problems. In recent years, significant progress has been made on a number of open problems in this area, often using approaches that transcend traditional discipline boundaries by combining modern methods of modelling, computation and mathematical analysis. The two-part theme issue aims to represent the breadth of these approaches, focusing on problems that are mathematical in nature but help to understand aspects of real physical importance such as fluid dynamical stability, transport, mixing, dissipation and vortex dynamics. This article is part of the theme issue 'Mathematical problems in physical fluid dynamics (part 2)'.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: Editorial
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.004
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0040.002
Research integrity0.0120.016
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.018

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering SciencesSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207