Applications of fluid dynamics and mechanics of continua in forensics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Here, an overview is given of a collection of works published by Physics of Fluids under an umbrella-title Flow and Forensics. These works span the two fields, which currently coexist without too much interaction, namely, fluid mechanics and forensic science. Nevertheless, both fields reveal mutual interest for quite some time. The present work demonstrates that not only a tangential interaction, but a wide mutual polymer-like reptation might be beneficial for both fields. The present set of works already demonstrates that sub-fields of fluid mechanics, such as multi-phase flows, gas dynamics, and rheology, fluid mechanical topics, such as drops and vortices, and tools, such as de Laval nozzle, are not alien at all to forensic science subjects and could be beneficial for them. In its turn, forensic science can enrich fluid mechanics by such subjects as blood pattern analysis, blood and brain spatter analysis, prediction of the blood spatter origin, and delineation of a staged suicide (a homicide) from a real one.
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 | 0.000 | 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".