MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404042997 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2024.767

Self-selection of flow instabilities by acoustic perturbations around rectangular cylinder in cross-flow

2024· article· en· W4404042997 on OpenAlexaff
Atef Mohany, Ahmed Shoukry, Luc Pastur

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid Dynamics and Vibration Analysis
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMechanicsFlow (mathematics)CylinderPotential flow around a circular cylinderPhysicsOpen-channel flowGeometryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work experimentally investigates the flow structure around a rectangular cylinder with an aspect ratio of 2 under varying incidence angles to examine how acoustic perturbations modify and modulate the unsteady flow instabilities. In the absence of acoustic excitation, the angle of incidence is found to markedly influence the flow topology and the natural shedding pattern altering the vortex formation length and wake dynamics. With acoustic perturbations, it is observed that for incidence angles $\alpha = 0^{\circ }$ and $\alpha = 5^{\circ }$ , the masked impinging leading-edge vortex (ILEV)/trailing-edge vortex shedding (TEVS) instability modes of $n= 1$ and $n= 2$ become evident when their frequencies coincide with the frequencies of the acoustic perturbations (i.e. resonant condition). Both trailing-edge and leading-edge vortices were found to be modulated by the acoustic pressure cycle. These instability modes, which are naturally present under non-resonant conditions for significantly higher aspect ratios, highlight the role of incidence angle and self-excited acoustic resonance in virtually augmenting the streamwise length of the cylinder, thereby facilitating the emergence and sustenance of the ILEV/TEVS shedding pattern.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 Fluid MechanicsSame topicFluid Dynamics and Vibration AnalysisFrench-language works237,207