MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7116095019 · doi:10.82417/k8yt-p602

Spacing ratio effects on the interference of three-dimensional twin synthetic jets

2025· other· en· W7116095019 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueEspace ÉTS (ETS) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlliance de recherche numérique du CanadaConcordia University
KeywordsReynolds numberJet (fluid)TurbulenceInterference (communication)Mixing (physics)VortexAspect ratio (aeronautics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A numerical study is performed to investigate the effects of spacing ratio (s/d = 1.2, 2.0, 3.0 and 4, where s is the center-to-center distance between the jets and d is the jet-exit diameter) on the mixing and turbulence characteristics of a circular twin synthetic jet (TSJ) using Improved Delay Detached Eddy Simulations (IDDES). The Reynolds number based on the maximum centerline jet-exit velocity was fixed at Re = 310 with an actuation frequency of 300Hz . Both the phase-averaged and time-averaged results showed that the inner shear layers of the TSJ converge at the merging point, promoting interactions within the jets, which causes the jets to combine into a single jet further downstream. The merging and combined points increased linearly with the spacing ratio. However, the velocity decay rate of each jet generally decreased as the spacing ratio increased. For s/d = 1.2 and 2.0, the merging of the jets induced an axis-switching phenomenon, which was not observed for the larger spacing ratios. Q-criterion was used to examine the three-dimensional vortical structures associated with axis-switching and interference between the TSJ.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.392
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.009

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.235 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueEspace ÉTS (ETS)French-language works237,207