Reduced-order modeling of unsteady fluid flow using neural network ensembles
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of deep learning has become increasingly popular in reduced-order models (ROMs) to obtain low-dimensional representations of full-order models. Convolutional autoencoders (CAEs) are often used to this end as they are adept at handling data that are spatially distributed, including solutions to partial differential equations. When applied to unsteady physics problems, ROMs also require a model for time-series prediction of the low-dimensional latent variables. Long short-term memory (LSTM) networks, a type of recurrent neural network useful for modeling sequential data, are frequently employed in data-driven ROMs for autoregressive time-series prediction. When making predictions at unseen design points over long time horizons, error propagation is a frequently encountered issue, where errors made early on can compound over time and lead to large inaccuracies. In this work, we propose using bagging, a commonly used ensemble learning technique, to develop a fully data-driven ROM framework referred to as the CAE-eLSTM ROM that uses CAEs for spatial reconstruction of the full-order model and LSTM ensembles for time-series prediction. When applied to two unsteady fluid dynamics problems, our results show that the presented framework effectively reduces error propagation and leads to more accurate time-series prediction of latent variables at unseen points.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it