MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322630531 · doi:10.3390/fluids8030086

A Highly Scalable Direction-Splitting Solver on Regular Cartesian Grid to Compute Flows in Complex Geometries Described by STL Files

2023· article· en· W4322630531 on OpenAlexafffund
Antoine Morente, Aashish Goyal, Anthony Wachs

Bibliographic record

VenueFluids · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputational Geometry and Mesh Generation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGridComputational scienceSolverScalabilityTriangulationComputer scienceComputationRegular gridCartesian coordinate systemSupercomputerParallel computingFlow (mathematics)AlgorithmMesh generationComputer graphics (images)TracingRay tracing (physics)GeometryMathematicsPhysicsProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We implement the Direction-Splitting solver originally proposed by Keating and Minev in 2013 and allow complex geometries to be described by a triangulation defined in STL files. We develop an algorithm that computes intersections and distances between the regular Cartesian grid and the surface triangulation using a ray-tracing method. We thoroughly validate the implementation on assorted flow configurations. Finally, we illustrate the scalability of our implementation on a test case of a steady flow through 144,327 spherical obstacles randomly distributed in a tri-periodic box at Re=19.2. The grid comprises 6.8 billion cells and the computation runs on 6800 cores of a supercomputer in less than 48 h.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFluidsSame topicComputational Geometry and Mesh GenerationFrench-language works237,207