MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410322529 · doi:10.1017/jfm.2025.343

The implications of a fluid yield stress

2025· article· en· W4410322529 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fluid Mechanics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
TopicProbabilistic and Robust Engineering Design
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYield (engineering)Stress (linguistics)MechanicsMaterials sciencePhysicsComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While we now have a relatively good understanding of low-Reynolds-number hydrodynamics, and elegant techniques to dissect it, one cannot truly say the same for yield-stress fluids. For these materials, the nonlinearity associated with the yield stress complicates analysis and prevents the use of many of the techniques used for slow viscous flow. Simultaneously, the presence of a yield stress introduces a range of new features into the problem beyond those of traditional Stokes flow. Accordingly, in this essay, we discuss the impact of a yield stress in the relatively simple setting of two-dimensional, steady, inertialess flow. The main goals are to establish intuition for the dramatically different features that can be introduced to the flow by the yield stress, and to outline the various tools available to the modeller to construct and interpret these flows.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.830

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.271 · 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