MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389584819 · doi:10.17118/11143/20883

On deriving test cases for benchmarking methods for simulating transportcharacteristics of triply periodic minimal surfaces

2023· article· en· W4389584819 on OpenAlexaff
Nipin Lokanathan, Krishna Sahithi, Kevin Zhang, Prateek Gupta, Jean-Pierre Hickey

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Theoretical and Applied Studies in Material Sciences and Geometry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmarkingComputer scienceTest (biology)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Triply periodic minimal surfaces (TPMS) have found a wide spectrum of applications ranging from synthesis of artificial bone to aerospace engineering. These structures are adopted in these fields due to their favorable mechanical and thermal properties. The necessity of precise predictive characterization of their transport properties is evident. However, there exists a considerable gap in the estimated transport properties of TPMS structures between numerical simulations and experiments in the literature. Conflicting results are present in the literature even for the three most common TPMS types (gyroid, diamond, and primitive). For example, Santos et al. found through experiment that at 50% porosity, the gyroid lattice was the most permeable of the three. However, Jung et al., using finite volume method (FVM), showed that the primitive lattice had the highest permeability.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 topicAdvanced Theoretical and Applied Studies in Material Sciences and GeometryFrench-language works237,207