Investigation of Temperature Distribution in a Slab Using Lattice Boltzmann Method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the temperature distribution in a slab was investigated. A model based on the Boltzmann transport equation without heat source was simplified using the Bhatnagar-Gross-Krook (BGK) approximation was applied. This is an example of the Lattice Boltzmann Method. The model was developed based on using a D2Q4 lattice arrangement for the medium of study. To obtain results, the model was tested on different cases: Two box-shaped slabs with different boundary conditions, and a T-shaped and an L-shaped slabs to determine the temperature distributions different times t > 0. The results obtained based on the developed model were validated with the enterprise software COMSOL Multiphysics which is based on the Finite Element Method. For the two cases of box-shaped and the T-shaped slabs, their results were in nearly perfect agreement with the finite element method. However, for the L-shaped slab, there was good agreement at most points apart from the regions where there was change of shape. In conclusion there is high agreement between the results of LBM and using COMSOL, which proves that LBM can be used to determine temperature distribution in a slab accurately.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".