MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313016617 · doi:10.52843/cassyni.m19522

Exploring the limits of flow measurements over very large volumes

2021· preprint· en· W4313016617 on OpenAlexaff
David E. Rival

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWind and Air Flow Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoap bubbleAirflowTracking (education)Scale (ratio)Flow (mathematics)Characterization (materials science)Computer scienceBoundary layerBubbleBoundary (topology)MathematicsPhysicsMechanicsOpticsCartographyMechanical engineeringEngineeringGeographyMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

State-of-the-art flow measurements typically utilize four or more high-speed cameras to perform highly-accurate Lagrangian particle tracking (LPT) over small-to-medium-sized measurement volumes (Schanz et al., 2016). Recently, Hou et al. (2021) proposed a novel LPT approach that allows for measurement over significantly larger measurement volumes on the order of 10m3 while simplifying the experimental setup. Here, a single camera is used to track centimeter-sized soap bubbles in three dimensions by not only evaluating the bubble-center location but also the bubble-image size itself. Possible applications of the suggested approach include – but are not limited to – measurements in industrial wind tunnels (Hou et al., 2021), full-scale measurements in the atmospheric boundary layer (Rosi et al., 2014; Toloui et al., 2014), and the characterization of airflow in indoor spaces, such as offices or classrooms (Kaehler et al., 2020). With such large-scale measurements come challenges associated with identifying characteristic features with inherently sparse data. Existing approaches, including coherent-structure coloring (CSC) – see Schlueter-Kuck Dabiri (2017)) and Martins et al. (2021) – will be reviewed before a new approach based on multi-scale recurrence networks will be tested on a series of canonical problems.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.140 · 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 designObservational
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 topicWind and Air Flow StudiesFrench-language works237,207