MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385766390 · doi:10.1002/aic.18209

Interpolation of probability‐driven model to predict hydrodynamic forces and torques in particle‐laden flows

2023· article· en· W4385766390 on OpenAlexafffund
Li‐Tao Zhu, Anthony Wachs

Bibliographic record

VenueAIChE Journal · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGranular flow and fluidized beds
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCompute CanadaBanting Research Foundation
KeywordsInterpolation (computer graphics)Closure (psychology)TorqueReynolds numberMechanicsParticle (ecology)ComputationMathematicsEuler's formulaWork (physics)Classical mechanicsStatistical physicsApplied mathematicsPhysicsMathematical analysisAlgorithmGeologyMotion (physics)TurbulenceThermodynamics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The development of hydrodynamic force/torque closure models with physical fidelity is crucial for ensuring reliable Euler–Lagrange simulations in particle‐laden flows. Our previous work (Seyed‐Ahmadi and Wachs. J Fluid Mech . 2020;900:A21) proposed a microstructure‐informed probability‐driven point‐particle (MPP) method to construct a data‐driven particle‐position‐dependent closure model, incorporating the effect of surrounding particle positions on forces/torques. However, the MPP model is not pluggable in Euler–Lagrange simulations due to the computation of constant coefficients through linear regression and reliance on statistical arguments to obtain the probability map for a pair of values of solid volume fraction ( Φ ) and Reynolds number (Re). To overcome this limitation, we propose an interpolated MPP (iMPP) method, involving interpolation in the Φ and Re spaces. Our results demonstrate that the iMPP method can capture over 70% of the total fluctuations in hydrodynamic forces/torques in approximately 97.8% of the tested cases. This advancement contributes to a more versatile closure model suitable for integration into E‐L simulations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.293

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIChE JournalSame topicGranular flow and fluidized bedsFrench-language works237,207