Hystereses in flow-induced compression of a poroelastic hydrogel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigate theoretically the one-dimensional compression of a hydrogel layer by a uniform fluid flow normal to the gel surface. The flow is driven by a pressure drop across the gel layer, which is modeled as a poroelastic medium. The novelty comes from considering, for the first time, the impact of interfacial permeability and compression. This leads to several new features for the flow and gel compression. As the pressure simultaneously drives the Darcy flow through the pores and compresses the gel, the flux-pressure relationship may become non-monotonic. Most interestingly, we discover two types of hysteresis when the pressure or the flux is controlled, which are also confirmed by transient numerical simulations. The first type of hysteresis stems from the interplay between the gel compression at the upstream interface and that in the bulk of the gel, and would not be predicted by models that ignore the interfacial compression. The second type hinges on strain-hardening in the gel that maintains a non-vanishing permeability at high pressure. Finally, we suggest experimental setups and conditions to seek such hystereses in real gels.
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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".