MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389540966 · doi:10.17118/11143/20980

Numerical investigation into the influence of scale shape on thehydrodynamics of fish scale arrays

2023· article· en· W4389540966 on OpenAlexaff
Isaac Clapp, Kamran Ahmed Siddiqui

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and fisheries research
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScale (ratio)Fish <Actinopterygii>Scale effectsComputer scienceNumerical modelsEnvironmental scienceComputer simulationFisherySimulationGeographyBiologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aerodynamic drag is a problem that persists in many industries but has a particularly profound impact on energy consumption in the transportation sector. Naturally occurring surfaces have been optimized over thousands of years to handle the aerodynamic or hydrodynamic drag they experience. An understanding of these optimized features and underlying mechanisms would assist researchers and engineers to adapt these features in practical applications to reduce drag. One interesting feature that has received recent attention is the surface structure of fish scales. While these scales form an armor layer for fish, they also introduce a unique topography that interacts with the surrounding environment. Recent research has found that these fish scale arrays play an important role in delaying the transition from laminar to turbulent flow. However, studies have largely focused on studying the influence of a specific scale size and shape, yet research in the field of surface characterization has found that the scale size and shape can vary significantly between species and in different body sections of an individual fish. Given that the purpose of these scale variations is not well understood, there exists a need to study the influence of scale shape on the flow behaviour over these scale arrays. Knowledge of the role these variations play in modifying the flow structure can be used to enhance the design of structured surfaces which target drag reduction in practical engineering applications.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.240
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine and fisheries research→French-language works237,207→