Impact of temperature-reliant thermal conductivity and viscosity variations on the convection of Jeffrey fluid in a rotating cellular porous layer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this analysis, the collective impact of temperature-dependent thermal conductivity and viscosity variations on the convective instability of a Jeffrey fluid in a rotating layer of cellular porous material is examined using an improved Jeffrey–Darcy model. This study has significant implications for cellular foams made from plastics, ceramics and metals, in which radiative heat transmission can be taken as a diffusion practice. Utilizing the linear stability concept and Galerkin method, approximate analytical and numerical solutions accurate to one decimal place are offered. The analysis reveals that the effect of the thermal conductivity variation factor and the rotation factor is to postpone the convective wave, whereas the viscosity variation factor and the Jeffrey factor have a dual effect in the form of rotation. The range of the convective cell is reduced with cumulating thermal conductivity variation factor, viscosity variation factor, Jeffrey factor and rotation factor. In the absence of rotation, the range of the convective cell is not dependent on the Jeffrey factor or the viscosity variation factor. Furthermore, the outcomes are matched with the existing literature for the specific case of this investigation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".