MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7105922355 · doi:10.23952/jano.7.2025.3.06

Shapes optimising grand resistance tensor entries for a rigid body in a Stokes flow

2025· article· en· W7105922355 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied and Numerical Optimization · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFluid dynamics and aerodynamics studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPrecursory Research for Embryonic Science and TechnologyDivision of Mathematical SciencesAgence Nationale de la RechercheResearch Institute for Mathematical SciencesJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceConseil Régional des Pays de la Loire
KeywordsRigid bodyFlow (mathematics)Tensor (intrinsic definition)Rigid frameSlender-body theoryWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the optimal shapes for the hydrodynamic resistance of a rigid body set in motion in a Stokes flow.At this low Reynolds number regime, the hydrodynamic drag properties of an object are encoded in a finite number of parameters contained in the grand resistance tensor.Considering these parameters as objective functions, we use calculus of variations techniques to derive a general shape derivative formula, allowing to specify how to deform the body shape to improve the objective value of any given resistance tensor entry.We then describe a practical algorithm for numerically computing the optimized shapes and apply it to several examples.Numerical results reveal interesting new geometries for various criteria and perspectives into optimal hydrodynamic profiles.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Applied and Numerical OptimizationSame topicFluid dynamics and aerodynamics studiesFrench-language works237,207