MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387126861 · doi:10.1115/gt2023-101480

Convergence of Dynamic Mode Decomposition As an Assessment Criteria for Completion of Internal, Unsteady Flow Simulations

2023· article· en· W4387126861 on OpenAlexaff
Jeff Defoe

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDynamic mode decompositionComputational fluid dynamicsComputer scienceAirfoilComputationAlgorithmTurbulenceFlow (mathematics)Lift (data mining)Mathematical optimizationSimulationMechanicsMathematicsPhysicsData mining

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The length of simulation time for unsteady computational fluid dynamics (CFD) is often based on intuition or best practices, as there is no established convergence criteria to guarantee the computations have generated enough flow to resolve all spatio-temporal content. Thus, these simulations are often run longer than necessary, but this increases the run time and computational resources required. This is often the case for unsteady CFD for turbomachines. This paper introduces an algorithm, based on dynamic mode decomposition (DMD), that can determine when continuing an unsteady CFD computation no longer yields additional spatio-temporal information. The algorithm is shown to correctly determine the modal content for an analytical dataset with a start-up transient with 44% less data than by only using data from after the start-up transient. The algorithm is then applied to 2D CFD of a fully turbulent flow over a cylinder with periodic boundaries, where the amount of flow time required is just sufficient for the size of fluctuations in cylinder lift coefficient to stop growing. The algorithm is also applied to a 2D periodic flow over a rotor airfoil, with an empty stationary duct downstream. The algorithm determines the point at which the statio-temporal content of the flow stops changing meaningfully greatly in advance of using conventional methods.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.288

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.375 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207