Modeling high-Mach-number rarefied crossflows past a flat plate using the maximum-entropy moment method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 10 and 14-moment maximum-entropy methods are applied to the study of high-Mach-number non-reacting crossflows past a flat plate at large degrees of rarefaction. The moment solutions are compared to particle-based kinetic solutions, showing a varying degree of accuracy. At a Knudsen number of 0.1, the 10-moment method is able to reproduce the shock layer, while it fails to predict the low-density wake region, due to the lack of a heat flux. Conversely, the 14-moment method results in accurate predictions of both regions. At a Knudsen number of 1, the 10-moment method produces unphysical results in both the shock layer and in the wake. The 14-moment method also shows a reduced accuracy, but manages to predict a reasonable shock region, free of unphysical sub-shocks and is in qualitative agreement with the kinetic solution. Accuracy is partially lost in the wake, where the 14-moment method predicts a thin unphysical high-density layer, concentrated on the centerline. An analysis of the velocity distribution functions (VDF) indicates strongly non-Maxwellian shapes and the presence of distinct particle populations, in the wake, crossing each other at the centerline. The particle-based and the 14-moment method VDFs are in qualitative agreement.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".