MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4389584902 · doi:10.17118/11143/20875

Evaluation of implicit LES modeling of separated flows in abackward-facing step

2023· article· en· W4389584902 on OpenAlexaff
Fatemeh Malmir, Jérôme Vetel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper assesses the implicit Large Eddy Simulation (iLES) technique to model a separated flow over a backwardfacing step (BFS), in comparison with results achieved by Direct Numerical Simulation (DNS).The iLES technique, implemented in the open-source code "Incompact3d", relies on introducing an artificial viscosity in the discretization of the viscous term to control spurious oscillations.To the best of the author's knowledge, this method has not been tested on wall-bounded separated flows where modeling wall regions with classical LES techniques is challenging.An internal flow over a BFS is simulated at Reynolds number Re = 5000 and expansion ratio Er = 2. Two inflow conditions are considered upstream of the expansion: a laminar Poiseuille flow and a turbulent inflow.The underestimation of the reattachment location of the primary geometry-induced separation bubble leads to the spatial shift of the secondary pressure-induced separation bubble formed on the top wall in the laminar BFS.Despite this underestimation in iLES, an excellent agreement has been obtained on the mean flow properties and Reynolds stress budgets with 12 times fewer grid points than DNS.

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)0.001
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows→French-language works237,207→