MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399135318 · doi:10.1080/14685248.2024.2360186

Effects of roughness on non-equilibrium turbulent boundary layers

2024· article· en· W4399135318 on OpenAlexaff
Ralph J. Volino, Daniel Fritsch, William J. Devenport, Luís Eça, Ricardo García-Mayoral, Beverley McKeon, Ugo Piomelli, Daniel Chung, Vidya Vishwanathan, Maarten Kerkvliet, Serge Toxopeus, Nicholas Hutchins

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Turbulence · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent Flows
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
KeywordsTurbulenceBoundary layerMechanicsSurface finishBoundary (topology)Statistical physicsMaterials scienceClassical mechanicsPhysicsMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of roughness were considered as part of a NATO Advanced Vehicle Technology effort titled ‘Non-Equilibrium Turbulent Boundary Layers at High Reynolds Numbers’ (NATO AVT-349). This paper comments on the current state of understanding of the flow physics and modelling efforts to predict rough-wall boundary layer behaviour. Outer layer similarity to smooth wall flows and Reynolds number effects are discussed for zero, favourable, and adverse pressure gradients based on the results of experiments and numerical simulations. Various types of modelling are considered including Reynolds averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) models with different roughness and turbulence models, wall-modelled large eddy simulations (WMLES), and resolvent models. Current needs and gaps in present understanding are discussed along with recommendations for future experiments and computations.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of TurbulenceSame topicFluid Dynamics and Turbulent FlowsFrench-language works237,207