MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Shape optimization for fluid flow with parametric level set method and deep neural networks

2025· article· en· W4409359484 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers & Fluids · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicComputer Graphics and Visualization Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsArtificial neural networkLevel set (data structures)Flow (mathematics)Level set methodShape optimizationSet (abstract data type)Parametric statisticsComputer scienceComputational fluid dynamicsMathematicsMathematical optimizationArtificial intelligenceGeometryMechanicsPhysicsFinite element methodStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents a novel application of the parametric level-set (PLS) method to develop a shape optimization process by directly modifying flow dynamics. The present method employs linear superimposition of polynomial perturbations to traditional PLS as shape optimization parameters. This enables smooth shape changes without any change in topology and limits the design variables to only the number of polynomials required for arbitrary hydrofoil morphing. During optimization, deep convolutional neural networks are integrated with the point clouds of the uniform level set to provide a surrogate model for flow dynamics. The present shape optimization method is employed here to delay stall via mitigation of flow separation on the suction surface of the NACA66 hydrofoil at high angles of attack. Shape optimization mitigates the forward movement of trailing edge flow reversal via changes in hydrofoil thickness and camber forward of the maximum hydrofoil thickness point. The optimized design shows more than two order reductions in mean flow reversal compared to NACA66 under the design condition angle of attack of 11 . 5 ∘ . At 14°, NACA66 shows complete flow separation while the optimized design exhibits almost three orders lower mean reversal magnitude of top surface flow than that of NACA66, indicating significantly delayed flow separation characteristics. The surrogate-based optimization is performed at four orders of magnitude lower computation time than full-order flow solvers. The results demonstrate the potential of the proposed PLS and deep neural network methodology to perform fast data-driven (non-intrusive) shape optimization of fluid flow. • Novel parametric level set framework with smooth shape morphing capabilities. • Scalable fluid flow optimization via integration with convolutional neural networks. • Shape optimization enables robust mitigation of hydrofoil flow separation and stall. • Increasing leading-edge camber is an important hydrofoil stall mitigation mechanism. • Maximum thickness in optimized hydrofoils converges to 32% of chord length.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.280 · 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