pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.12014 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-12 · ⚛️ physics.flu-dyn · physics.comp-ph

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Formulations for scalar boundedness in simulations of turbulent compressible multi-component flows using high-order finite-difference methods

Armin Wehrfritz, Evatt R. Hawkes, Ye Wang

Pith reviewed 2026-05-13 04:39 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.flu-dyn physics.comp-ph
keywords scalar boundednesshigh-order finite differenceturbulent compressible flowsmulti-component flowsnumerical dissipationmonotonicity-preserving limitermixing layeradaptive flux
0
0 comments X

The pith

Formulations for high-order finite-difference schemes preserve scalar boundedness without predefined bounds in turbulent compressible multi-component flows.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper develops numerical methods for simulating turbulent flows with multiple chemical species that must keep quantities like mass fractions strictly between zero and one. High-order central schemes are accurate but introduce dispersion errors that create unphysical oscillations and negative values on coarse grids. The authors augment the central flux with an adaptive dissipative term that switches between high-order and low-order behavior only where needed, using either artificial viscosity or a monotonicity-preserving limiter. Tests on one-dimensional advection and a three-dimensional under-resolved mixing layer show that the limiter version maintains bounds while preserving accuracy and adding little extra diffusion.

Core claim

By augmenting the non-dissipative numerical flux of a high-order central-difference scheme with an explicit dissipative numerical flux that adaptively switches between high-order and low-order formulations, scalar boundedness can be preserved without predefined bounds while maintaining high accuracy and low numerical dissipation. Two concrete realizations are constructed, one based on Jameson's artificial viscosity and one on a monotonicity-preserving limiter; the latter demonstrates superior performance in accuracy, boundedness of species mass fractions, and numerical diffusivity when applied to one-dimensional scalar advection and three-dimensional temporal turbulent mixing-layer flows.

What carries the argument

Adaptive dissipative numerical flux that switches between high-order and low-order formulations, constructed on top of a chosen non-dissipative central-difference flux, implemented either via Jameson's artificial viscosity or a monotonicity-preserving limiter.

If this is right

  • Unphysical negative mass fractions and simulation instabilities are avoided in multi-component compressible turbulence calculations.
  • High-order accuracy and low dissipation are retained even when grids cannot resolve all small-scale gradients.
  • The monotonicity-preserving limiter version outperforms the artificial-viscosity version on the tested advection and mixing-layer cases.
  • Sharp scalar interfaces can be handled without global order reduction or excessive smearing.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same adaptive-flux idea could be combined with other high-order spatial discretizations or time integrators used in combustion or atmospheric modeling.
  • Because bounds are enforced locally and without user-specified limits, the method may reduce the need for ad-hoc clipping or renormalization steps in production codes.
  • Extension to unstructured meshes or adaptive mesh refinement would require only re-derivation of the switching sensor on the new stencil geometry.

Load-bearing premise

The adaptive switching between high-order and low-order dissipative formulations will control dispersion-induced oscillations in highly under-resolved turbulence without adding excessive numerical diffusivity or lowering accuracy.

What would settle it

Perform the three-dimensional temporal turbulent mixing-layer simulation with the proposed schemes on the same under-resolved grid and check whether species mass fractions remain strictly between zero and one while the resolved turbulent kinetic energy and scalar spectra stay close to a reference high-resolution run.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.12014 by Armin Wehrfritz, Evatt R. Hawkes, Ye Wang.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Results of density, temperature, H2 mass fraction, O2 mass fraction, and velocity over one period for the one-dimensional advection case with sharp initial conditions. first period and eventually blows up at time t = 1.44. With the high-order dissipative flux term, the M1 scheme significantly cuts down the oscillations and therefore stabilises the simulation. Nevertheless, there still exist significant exc… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Activation of the low-order term (dashed line) of the M2-JS scheme based on the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Temporal evolution of normalised H2 mass fraction boundedness error and normalised numerical interface thickness for the case with sharp initial conditions. 4.1.3 Convergence tests To verify the order of accuracy of the proposed schemes, a convergence study is carried out and results are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The L 1 norm (labelled using □) and L∞ norm (labelled using ♢) of errors in density, H2 mass fraction and velocity in computations for the cases with (a) smooth initial condition and (b) sharp initial condition. not converge due to large dispersion errors, whereas first-order convergence with respect to the L 1 errors is observed with the M1 scheme. The M2-MP scheme also achieves nearly first-order converg… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Initial profiles of the streamwise velocity, the O [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The means (averages on transverse planes, Mean( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Instantaneous visualisations of O2 mass fraction computed using different schemes at (a) tˆ= 40 and (b) tˆ= 80. layer (see also Figure 7a). The scalar variance increases again with the transition to turbulence at tˆ = 60. The differences in magnitude can be directly attributed to the numerical diffusion induced by the numerical schemes as schemes including a low-order flux (M2-JS, M2-MP, and M3-MP) have si… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Temporal evolution of the global maximum over- and undershoots in the O [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Temporal evolution of the fractions of unbounded grid points that have excursions [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: One-dimensional mass fraction and velocity spectra at flow time [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The p.d.f. of O2 mass fraction on different transverse planes at flow time tˆ= 80. 0.0 0.5 1.0 zˆ 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 Mean( YO2 ) hYO2 i ≈0.07 0.35 0.56 0.97 0.0 0.5 1.0 zˆ 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 Var( YO2 ) ×10−1 M1 M2-JS M2-MP M3-MP [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The mean and mixed-fluid variance of O2 mass fraction along axis ˆz = z/L at flow time tˆ= 80. bounded schemes lead to slight contractions of the p.d.f. distributions in the mixed-fluid range and small shifts of the p.d.f. peak on plane ⟨YO2 ⟩ ≈ 0.56. Despite that, these changes minimally affect the mixed-fluid variance, as shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: The p.d.f. of O2 mass fraction on different transverse planes at flow time tˆ= 48. At tˆ= 48, the mixing zone is primarily characterised by two-dimensional vortices spanning in the y-direction, similar to the structures at tˆ= 40 visualised in Figure 7a. Therefore, the p.d.f. on the mid-plane shows a unimodal distribution around YO2 = 0.5 consistently for all schemes. Comparing the bounded schemes to the … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Preserving scalar boundedness is important for numerical schemes used in turbulent compressible multi-component flow simulations to prevent unphysical results and unstable simulations. However, ensuring scalar boundedness for high-order, low-dissipation numerical schemes poses challenges in highly under-resolved conditions due to inherent dispersion errors that generate spurious oscillations. Numerical dissipation is needed to mitigate these oscillations, but excessive dissipation negatively affects resolution. In this work, we propose formulations for high-order finite-difference schemes to preserve scalar boundedness without predefined bounds, while maintaining high accuracy and low numerical dissipation. The proposed formulations augment a non-dissipative numerical flux of a high-order central-difference scheme with an explicit dissipative numerical flux that adaptively switches between high-order and low-order formulations. Building on a deliberate choice of the non-dissipative flux, we construct two schemes using Jameson's artificial viscosity method and a monotonicity-preserving limiter as the dissipative flux. We examine the schemes in one-dimensional scalar advection problems and a three-dimensional temporal turbulent mixing-layer case involving sharp scalar gradients and under-resolved conditions, evaluating their accuracy, boundedness of species mass fractions, and numerical diffusivity. The scheme with the monotonicity-preserving limiter demonstrates superior performance.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proposes two formulations that augment a non-dissipative high-order central finite-difference flux with an adaptive dissipative flux to enforce boundedness of scalar mass fractions in compressible multi-component turbulent flows without supplying a priori bounds. One formulation uses Jameson's artificial viscosity; the other employs a monotonicity-preserving limiter. Both are evaluated on 1D scalar advection problems and a 3D temporal turbulent mixing layer with sharp gradients and under-resolved turbulence, with quantitative assessment of accuracy, boundedness, and numerical diffusivity; the MP-limiter variant is reported to be superior on all three metrics.

Significance. If the numerical evidence holds, the work supplies practical, high-order schemes that maintain scalar boundedness while keeping added dissipation low enough to preserve resolution in under-resolved multi-species turbulence. This directly addresses a recurring obstacle in high-fidelity simulations of reacting flows and multi-component aerodynamics, where unphysical scalar values can destabilize computations or degrade accuracy.

minor comments (3)
  1. §3.2 and §4.1: the precise definition of the adaptive sensor (including any threshold values) should be stated explicitly in the text rather than only in the algorithm box, to allow immediate reproduction.
  2. Figure 7 and Table 2: the error norms and boundedness violation counts for the MP-limiter scheme are shown only for selected times; adding a single summary table of time-averaged metrics across all tested resolutions would strengthen the cross-case comparison.
  3. The manuscript cites the original Jameson and MP-limiter references but does not discuss how the present adaptive switching differs from prior boundedness-preserving limiters in the compressible-flow literature; a short paragraph in the introduction would clarify novelty.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive summary of our manuscript, the recognition of its practical relevance to high-fidelity multi-component flow simulations, and the recommendation for minor revision. We appreciate that the referee accurately captured the core contributions of the two proposed formulations for enforcing scalar boundedness while preserving high-order accuracy and low dissipation.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper proposes two explicit augmentations (Jameson artificial viscosity and MP limiter) to a chosen non-dissipative central flux, with an adaptive switch defined by a sensor. These are standard techniques drawn from external literature rather than fitted to the target boundedness property or derived from self-referential definitions. The 1-D advection tests and 3-D mixing-layer results serve as independent numerical verification of boundedness, accuracy, and diffusivity; no equation reduces to a prior result by construction, no parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing uniqueness theorem is imported via self-citation. The construction therefore remains externally falsifiable and non-circular.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard assumptions of finite-difference stability and limiter properties from prior literature; no new free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented entities are introduced in the abstract description.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Established properties of central-difference schemes, Jameson's artificial viscosity, and monotonicity-preserving limiters apply directly to compressible multi-component flows.
    The formulations build directly on these without new proofs of applicability.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5521 in / 1265 out tokens · 66534 ms · 2026-05-13T04:39:47.430690+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 67 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    High-order fluxes for conservative skew-symmetric-like schemes in struc- tured meshes: Application to compressible flows

    F. Ducros et al. “High-order fluxes for conservative skew-symmetric-like schemes in struc- tured meshes: Application to compressible flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics 161.1 (2000), pp. 114–139.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1006/jcph.2000.6492

    work page doi:10.1006/jcph.2000.6492 2000

  2. [2]

    Skew-symmetric form of convective terms and fully conservative finite dif- ference schemes for variable density low-Mach number flows

    Yohei Morinishi. “Skew-symmetric form of convective terms and fully conservative finite dif- ference schemes for variable density low-Mach number flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics229.2 (2010), pp. 276–300.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2009.09.021

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2009.09.021 2010

  3. [3]

    Generalized conservative approximations of split convective derivative operators

    Sergio Pirozzoli. “Generalized conservative approximations of split convective derivative operators”. In:Journal of Computational Physics229.19 (2010), pp. 7180–7190.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2010.06.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2010.06.006 2010

  4. [4]

    Scalar conservation and boundedness in simulations of compressible flow

    Pramod K. Subbareddy, Anand Kartha, and Graham V. Candler. “Scalar conservation and boundedness in simulations of compressible flow”. In:Journal of Computational Physics 348 (2017), pp. 827–846.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2017.08.001

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2017.08.001 2017

  5. [5]

    Flux corrected finite volume scheme for preserving scalar boundedness in reacting large-eddy simulations

    M. Herrmann, G. Blanquart, and V. Raman. “Flux corrected finite volume scheme for preserving scalar boundedness in reacting large-eddy simulations”. In:AIAA Journal44.12 (2006), pp. 2879–2886.issn: 0001-1452 1533-385X.doi:10.2514/1.18235

    work page doi:10.2514/1.18235 2006

  6. [6]

    Scalar excursions in large-eddy simulations

    Georgios Matheou and Paul E. Dimotakis. “Scalar excursions in large-eddy simulations”. In:Journal of Computational Physics327 (2016), pp. 97–120.issn: 00219991.doi:10. 1016/j.jcp.2016.08.035

    work page 2016

  7. [7]

    An entropy-stable hybrid scheme for simulations of transcritical real-fluid flows

    Peter C. Ma, Yu Lv, and Matthias Ihme. “An entropy-stable hybrid scheme for simulations of transcritical real-fluid flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics340 (2017), pp. 330– 357.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2017.03.022

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2017.03.022 2017

  8. [8]

    Enforcing realizability in explicit multi- component species transport

    Randall J. McDermott and Jason E. Floyd. “Enforcing realizability in explicit multi- component species transport”. In:Fire safety journal78 (2015), pp. 180–187.issn: 0379- 7112.doi:10.1016/j.firesaf.2015.09.005

    work page doi:10.1016/j.firesaf.2015.09.005 2015

  9. [9]

    Communication-aware robotics: Exploiting motion for communication,

    Sergio Pirozzoli. “Numerical methods for high-speed flows”. In:Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics43.1 (2011), pp. 163–194.issn: 0066-4189 1545-4479.doi:10.1146/annurev- fluid-122109-160718

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev- 2011

  10. [10]

    Mixing, scalar boundedness, and numerical dissipation in large-eddy simulations

    Nek Sharan, Georgios Matheou, and Paul E. Dimotakis. “Mixing, scalar boundedness, and numerical dissipation in large-eddy simulations”. In:Journal of Computational Physics369 (2018), pp. 148–172.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2018.05.005

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2018.05.005 2018

  11. [11]

    Flux-corrected transport. I. SHASTA, a fluid transport algorithm that works

    Jay P. Boris and David L. Book. “Flux-corrected transport. I. SHASTA, a fluid transport algorithm that works”. In:Journal of Computational Physics11.1 (1973), pp. 38–69.issn: 0021-9991.doi:10.1016/0021-9991(73)90147-2

    work page doi:10.1016/0021-9991(73)90147-2 1973

  12. [12]

    Fully multidimensional flux-corrected transport algorithms for fluids

    Steven T. Zalesak. “Fully multidimensional flux-corrected transport algorithms for fluids”. In:Journal of Computational Physics31.3 (1979), pp. 335–362.issn: 0021-9991.doi:10. 1016/0021-9991(79)90051-2. 29

    work page 1979

  13. [13]

    Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme I. The quest of mono- tonicity

    Bram van Leer. “Towards the ultimate conservative difference scheme I. The quest of mono- tonicity”. In:Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Numerical Methods in Fluid Mechanics. Ed. by Henri Cabannes and Roger Temam. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1973, pp. 163–168.isbn: 978-3-540-38377-2

    work page 1973

  14. [14]

    On maximum-principle-satisfying high order schemes for scalar conservation laws

    Xiangxiong Zhang and Chi-Wang Shu. “On maximum-principle-satisfying high order schemes for scalar conservation laws”. In:Journal of Computational Physics229.9 (2010), pp. 3091–3120.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2009.12.030

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2009.12.030 2010

  15. [15]

    An improved bounded semi-Lagrangian scheme for the turbulent transport of passive scalars

    Siddhartha Verma, Y. Xuan, and G. Blanquart. “An improved bounded semi-Lagrangian scheme for the turbulent transport of passive scalars”. In:Journal of Computational Physics 272 (2014), pp. 1–22.issn: 0021-9991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2014.03.062

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2014.03.062 2014

  16. [16]

    Numerical solution of the Euler equations by finite volume methods using Runge Kutta time stepping schemes

    Antony Jameson, Wolfgang Schmidt, and Eli Turkel. “Numerical solution of the Euler equations by finite volume methods using Runge Kutta time stepping schemes”. In:14th fluid and plasma dynamics conference. 1981, p. 1259.doi:10.2514/6.1981-1259

    work page doi:10.2514/6.1981-1259 1981

  17. [17]

    Artificial fluid properties for large-eddy simulation of compressible turbulent mixing

    Andrew W. Cook. “Artificial fluid properties for large-eddy simulation of compressible turbulent mixing”. In:Physics of Fluids19.5 (2007), p. 055103.issn: 1070-6631.doi: 10.1063/1.2728937

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2728937 2007

  18. [18]

    Localized artificial diffusivity scheme for discontinuity capturing on curvilinear meshes

    S. Kawai and S. K. Lele. “Localized artificial diffusivity scheme for discontinuity capturing on curvilinear meshes”. In:Journal of Computational Physics227.22 (2008), pp. 9498– 9526.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2008.06.034

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2008.06.034 2008

  19. [19]

    A discrete-adjoint framework for optimizing high-fidelity simulations of turbulent reacting flows

    Ali Kord and Jesse Capecelatro. “A discrete-adjoint framework for optimizing high-fidelity simulations of turbulent reacting flows”. In:Proceedings of the Combustion Institute39.4 (2023), pp. 5375–5384.issn: 15407489.doi:10.1016/j.proci.2022.06.021

    work page doi:10.1016/j.proci.2022.06.021 2023

  20. [20]

    A stable and accurate convective modelling procedure based on quadratic upstream interpolation

    Brian P Leonard. “A stable and accurate convective modelling procedure based on quadratic upstream interpolation”. In:Computer methods in applied mechanics and engi- neering19.1 (1979), pp. 59–98.issn: 0045-7825.doi:10.1016/0045-7825(79)90034-3

    work page doi:10.1016/0045-7825(79)90034-3 1979

  21. [21]

    Structure of a high Karlovitz n- C7H16 premixed turbulent flame

    Bruno Savard, Brock Bobbitt, and Guillaume Blanquart. “Structure of a high Karlovitz n- C7H16 premixed turbulent flame”. In:Proceedings of the Combustion Institute35.2 (2015), pp. 1377–1384.issn: 1540-7489.doi:10.1016/j.proci.2014.06.133

    work page doi:10.1016/j.proci.2014.06.133 2015

  22. [22]

    A fast, low-memory, and stable algorithm for implementing multicom- ponent transport in direct numerical simulations

    Aaron J. Fillo et al. “A fast, low-memory, and stable algorithm for implementing multicom- ponent transport in direct numerical simulations”. In:Journal of Computational Physics 406 (2020), p. 109185.issn: 0021-9991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2019.109185

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2019.109185 2020

  23. [23]

    A minimum entropy principle in the gas dynamics equations

    Eitan Tadmor. “A minimum entropy principle in the gas dynamics equations”. In:Applied Numerical Mathematics2.3-5 (1986), pp. 211–219.issn: 0168-9274.doi:10.1016/0168- 9274(86)90029-2

    work page doi:10.1016/0168- 1986

  24. [24]

    Nonoscillatory high order accurate self-similar maximum principle satisfying shock capturing schemes I

    Xu-dong Liu and Stanley Osher. “Nonoscillatory high order accurate self-similar maximum principle satisfying shock capturing schemes I”. In:SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis 33.2 (1996), pp. 760–779.doi:10.1137/0733038

    work page doi:10.1137/0733038 1996

  25. [25]

    How to preserve the mass fractions positivity when computing compressible multi-component flows

    Bernard Larrouturou. “How to preserve the mass fractions positivity when computing compressible multi-component flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics95.1 (1991), pp. 59–84.issn: 0021-9991.doi:10.1016/0021-9991(91)90253-H

    work page doi:10.1016/0021-9991(91)90253-h 1991

  26. [26]

    High-order bound-preserving discontinuous Galerkin methods for multicomponent chemically reacting flows

    Jie Du and Yang Yang. “High-order bound-preserving discontinuous Galerkin methods for multicomponent chemically reacting flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics469 (2022), p. 111548.issn: 0021-9991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2022.111548. 30

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2022.111548 2022

  27. [27]

    Accurate monotonicity-preserving schemes with Runge–Kutta time stepping

    A. Suresh and H.T. Huynh. “Accurate monotonicity-preserving schemes with Runge–Kutta time stepping”. In:Journal of Computational Physics136.1 (1997), pp. 83–99.issn: 0021- 9991.doi:10.1006/jcph.1997.5745

    work page doi:10.1006/jcph.1997.5745 1997

  28. [28]

    High resolution schemes and the entropy con- dition

    Stanley Osher and Sukumar Chakravarthy. “High resolution schemes and the entropy con- dition”. In:SIAM Journal on Numerical Analysis21.5 (1984), pp. 955–984.doi:10.1137/ 0721060

    work page 1984

  29. [29]

    A method for the numerical calculation of hydro- dynamic shocks

    J. von Neumann and R. D. Richtmyer. “A method for the numerical calculation of hydro- dynamic shocks”. In:Journal of Applied Physics21.3 (1950), pp. 232–237.issn: 0021-8979 1089-7550.doi:10.1063/1.1699639

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1699639 1950

  30. [30]

    Adaptive energy stable artificial dissipation for preserving scalar boundedness in turbulent flows

    Ali Kord and Jesse Capecelatro. “Adaptive energy stable artificial dissipation for preserving scalar boundedness in turbulent flows”. In:Computers & Fluids254 (2023), p. 105776.issn: 0045-7930.doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2023.105776

    work page doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2023.105776 2023

  31. [31]

    Stable and accurate artificial dissi- pation

    Ken Mattsson, Magnus Sv¨ ard, and Jan Nordstr¨ om. “Stable and accurate artificial dissi- pation”. In:Journal of Scientific Computing21.1 (2004), pp. 57–79.issn: 0885-7474.doi: 10.1023/B:JOMP.0000027955.75872.3f

    work page doi:10.1023/b:jomp.0000027955.75872.3f 2004

  32. [32]

    Simulation and Analysis of Turbulent Multiphase Combustion Processes at High Pressures

    Joseph Charles Oefelein. “Simulation and Analysis of Turbulent Multiphase Combustion Processes at High Pressures”. Thesis. 1997

    work page 1997

  33. [34]

    Assessment of a high-order shock-capturing central-difference scheme for hypersonic turbulent flow simulations

    Luca Sciacovelli et al. “Assessment of a high-order shock-capturing central-difference scheme for hypersonic turbulent flow simulations”. In:Computers & Fluids230 (2021), p. 105134.issn: 0045-7930.doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2021.105134

    work page doi:10.1016/j.compfluid.2021.105134 2021

  34. [35]

    Conservative hybrid compact-WENO schemes for shock-turbulence in- teraction

    Sergio Pirozzoli. “Conservative hybrid compact-WENO schemes for shock-turbulence in- teraction”. In:Journal of Computational Physics178.1 (2002), pp. 81–117.issn: 00219991. doi:10.1006/jcph.2002.7021

    work page doi:10.1006/jcph.2002.7021 2002

  35. [36]

    TVB Runge-Kutta local projection discontinuous Galerkin finite element method for conservation laws III: One-dimensional systems

    Bernardo Cockburn, San-Yih Lin, and Chi-Wang Shu. “TVB Runge-Kutta local projection discontinuous Galerkin finite element method for conservation laws III: One-dimensional systems”. In:Journal of Computational Physics84.1 (1989), pp. 90–113.issn: 0021-9991. doi:10.1016/0021-9991(89)90183-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0021-9991(89)90183-6 1989

  36. [37]

    A characteristic-wise hybrid compact- WENO scheme for solving hyperbolic conservation laws

    Yu-Xin Ren, Miao’er Liu, and Hanxin Zhang. “A characteristic-wise hybrid compact- WENO scheme for solving hyperbolic conservation laws”. In:Journal of Computational Physics192.2 (2003), pp. 365–386.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2003.07.006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2003.07.006 2003

  37. [38]

    Physically consistent formulations of split convective terms for turbulent compressible multi-component flows

    Ye Wang, Armin Wehrfritz, and Evatt R. Hawkes. “Physically consistent formulations of split convective terms for turbulent compressible multi-component flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics540 (2025), p. 114269.issn: 0021-9991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2025. 114269

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2025 2025

  38. [39]

    Systems of conservation laws

    Peter Lax and Burton Wendroff. “Systems of conservation laws”. In:Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics13.2 (1960), pp. 217–237.issn: 0010-3640.doi:10.1002/ cpa.3160130205

    work page 1960

  39. [40]

    Several new numerical methods for compressible shear-layer simulations

    Christopher A. Kennedy and Mark H. Carpenter. “Several new numerical methods for compressible shear-layer simulations”. In:Applied Numerical Mathematics14.4 (1994), pp. 397–433.issn: 0168-9274.doi:10.1016/0168-9274(94)00004-2. 31

    work page doi:10.1016/0168-9274(94)00004-2 1994

  40. [41]

    A high-wavenumber viscosity for high-resolution numerical methods

    Andrew W. Cook and William H. Cabot. “A high-wavenumber viscosity for high-resolution numerical methods”. In:Journal of Computational Physics195.2 (2004), pp. 594–601.issn: 0021-9991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2003.10.012

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2003.10.012 2004

  41. [42]

    Kinetic energy preserving and entropy stable finite volume schemes for compressible Euler and Navier–Stokes equations

    Praveen Chandrashekar. “Kinetic energy preserving and entropy stable finite volume schemes for compressible Euler and Navier–Stokes equations”. In:Communications in Computational Physics14.5 (2015), pp. 1252–1286.issn: 1815-2406 1991-7120.doi: 10.4208/cicp.170712.010313a

    work page doi:10.4208/cicp.170712.010313a 2015

  42. [43]

    Comparison of some entropy conservative numerical fluxes for the Euler equations

    Hendrik Ranocha. “Comparison of some entropy conservative numerical fluxes for the Euler equations”. In:Journal of Scientific Computing76.1 (2017), pp. 216–242.issn: 0885-7474 1573-7691.doi:10.1007/s10915-017-0618-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s10915-017-0618-1 2017

  43. [44]

    A fully discrete, kinetic energy consistent finite-volume scheme for compressible flows

    Pramod K. Subbareddy and Graham V. Candler. “A fully discrete, kinetic energy consistent finite-volume scheme for compressible flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics228.5 (2009), pp. 1347–1364.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2008.10.026

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2008.10.026 2009

  44. [45]

    Approximate Riemann solvers, parameter vectors, and difference schemes

    Philip L. Roe. “Approximate Riemann solvers, parameter vectors, and difference schemes”. In:Journal of computational physics43.2 (1981), pp. 357–372.issn: 0021-9991.doi:10. 1016/0021-9991(81)90128-5

    work page 1981

  45. [46]

    Randall J LeVeque and Randall J Leveque.Numerical methods for conservation laws. Vol. 214. Springer, 1992

    work page 1992

  46. [47]

    The effect of the formulation of nonlinear terms on aliasing errors in spectral methods

    G.A. Blaisdell, E.T. Spyropoulos, and J.H. Qin. “The effect of the formulation of nonlinear terms on aliasing errors in spectral methods”. In:Applied Numerical Mathematics21.3 (1996), pp. 207–219.issn: 0168-9274.doi:10.1016/0168-9274(96)00005-0

    work page doi:10.1016/0168-9274(96)00005-0 1996

  47. [48]

    Numerical simulation of a compressible, homogeneous, turbulent shear flow. Report TF-13, Thermosciences Division

    WJ Feiereisen, WC Reynolds, and JH Ferziger. “Numerical simulation of a compressible, homogeneous, turbulent shear flow. Report TF-13, Thermosciences Division”. In:Mechan- ical Engineering, Stanford University(1981), p. 759

    work page 1981

  48. [49]

    Reduced aliasing formulations of the con- vective terms within the Navier–Stokes equations for a compressible fluid

    Christopher A Kennedy and Andrea Gruber. “Reduced aliasing formulations of the con- vective terms within the Navier–Stokes equations for a compressible fluid”. In:Journal of Computational Physics227.3 (2008), pp. 1676–1700.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp. 2007.09.020

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp 2008

  49. [50]

    Numerically stable formulations of convective terms for turbulent compressible flows

    Gennaro Coppola et al. “Numerically stable formulations of convective terms for turbulent compressible flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics382 (2019), pp. 86–104.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2019.01.007

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2019.01.007 2019

  50. [51]

    Kinetic energy and entropy preserving schemes for compressible flows by split convective forms

    Yuichi Kuya, Kosuke Totani, and Soshi Kawai. “Kinetic energy and entropy preserving schemes for compressible flows by split convective forms”. In:Journal of Computational Physics375 (2018), pp. 823–853.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2018.08.058

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2018.08.058 2018

  51. [52]

    Preventing spurious pressure oscillations in split convective form dis- cretization for compressible flows

    Nao Shima et al. “Preventing spurious pressure oscillations in split convective form dis- cretization for compressible flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics427 (2021), p. 110060.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2020.110060

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2020.110060 2021

  52. [53]

    The calculation of the interaction of non-stationary shock waves and obstacles

    Vladimir Vasil’evich Rusanov. “The calculation of the interaction of non-stationary shock waves and obstacles”. In:USSR Computational Mathematics and Mathematical Physics 1.2 (1962), pp. 304–320.issn: 0041-5553.doi:10.1016/0041-5553(62)90062-9

    work page doi:10.1016/0041-5553(62)90062-9 1962

  53. [54]

    Split form nodal discon- tinuous Galerkin schemes with summation-by-parts property for the compressible Euler equations

    Gregor J. Gassner, Andrew R. Winters, and David A. Kopriva. “Split form nodal discon- tinuous Galerkin schemes with summation-by-parts property for the compressible Euler equations”. In:Journal of Computational Physics327 (2016), pp. 39–66.issn: 00219991. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2016.09.013. 32

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2016.09.013 2016

  54. [55]

    Effect of numerical dissipation on the predicted spectra for compressible turbulence

    J. Larsson, S.K. Lele, and P. Moin. “Effect of numerical dissipation on the predicted spectra for compressible turbulence”. In:Annual research briefs(2007), pp. 47–57

    work page 2007

  55. [56]

    Large-eddy simulation and multiscale modelling of a Richtmyer–Meshkov instability with reshock

    D. J. Hill, C. Pantano, and D. I. Pullin. “Large-eddy simulation and multiscale modelling of a Richtmyer–Meshkov instability with reshock”. In:Journal of Fluid Mechanics557 (2006), pp. 29–61.issn: 0022-1120 1469-7645.doi:10.1017/s0022112006009475

    work page doi:10.1017/s0022112006009475 2006

  56. [57]

    Numerical viscosity and the entropy condition for conservative difference schemes

    Eitan Tadmor. “Numerical viscosity and the entropy condition for conservative difference schemes”. In:Mathematics of Computation43.168 (1984), pp. 369–381.doi:10 . 2307 / 2008282

    work page 1984

  57. [58]

    Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes

    Chi-Wang Shu and Stanley Osher. “Efficient implementation of essentially non-oscillatory shock-capturing schemes”. In:Journal of computational physics77.2 (1988), pp. 439–471. issn: 0021-9991.doi:10.1016/0021-9991(88)90177-5

    work page doi:10.1016/0021-9991(88)90177-5 1988

  58. [59]

    Computations of compressible multifluids

    R´ emi Abgrall and Smadar Karni. “Computations of compressible multifluids”. In:Journal of Computational Physics169.2 (2001), pp. 594–623.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1006/jcph. 2000.6685

    work page doi:10.1006/jcph 2001

  59. [60]

    Preventing numerical errors generated by interface- capturing schemes in compressible multi-material flows

    Eric Johnsen and Frank Ham. “Preventing numerical errors generated by interface- capturing schemes in compressible multi-material flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics231.17 (2012), pp. 5705–5717.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2012.04.048

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2012.04.048 2012

  60. [61]

    A robust and accurate numerical method for transcritical turbulent flows at supercritical pressure with an arbitrary equation of state

    Soshi Kawai, Hiroshi Terashima, and Hideyo Negishi. “A robust and accurate numerical method for transcritical turbulent flows at supercritical pressure with an arbitrary equation of state”. In:Journal of Computational Physics300 (2015), pp. 116–135.issn: 00219991. doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2015.07.047

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2015.07.047 2015

  61. [62]

    Turbulent shear-layer mixing: initial conditions, and direct-numerical and large-eddy simulations

    Nek Sharan, Georgios Matheou, and Paul E. Dimotakis. “Turbulent shear-layer mixing: initial conditions, and direct-numerical and large-eddy simulations”. In:Journal of Fluid Mechanics877 (2019), pp. 35–81.issn: 0022-1120 1469-7645.doi:10.1017/jfm.2019.591

    work page doi:10.1017/jfm.2019.591 2019

  62. [63]

    High order conservative finite difference scheme for variable density low Mach number turbulent flows

    Olivier Desjardins et al. “High order conservative finite difference scheme for variable density low Mach number turbulent flows”. In:Journal of Computational Physics227.15 (2008), pp. 7125–7159.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2008.03.027

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2008.03.027 2008

  63. [64]

    Large-eddy simulation and experiments on non-premixed highly turbulent opposed jet flows

    M.W.A. Pettit et al. “Large-eddy simulation and experiments on non-premixed highly turbulent opposed jet flows”. In:Proceedings of the Combustion Institute33.1 (2011), pp. 1391–1399.issn: 1540-7489.doi:10.1016/j.proci.2010.06.140

    work page doi:10.1016/j.proci.2010.06.140 2011

  64. [65]

    New insights into large eddy simulation

    Jay P. Boris et al. “New insights into large eddy simulation”. In:Fluid Dynamics Research 10.4-6 (1992), p. 199.doi:10.1016/0169-5983(92)90023-P

    work page doi:10.1016/0169-5983(92)90023-p 1992

  65. [66]

    Kolmogorov-like spectra in decaying three-dimensional supersonic flows

    David H. Porter, A. Pouquet, and Paul R. Woodward. “Kolmogorov-like spectra in decaying three-dimensional supersonic flows”. In:Physics of Fluids6.6 (1994), pp. 2133–2142.issn: 1070-6631.doi:10.1063/1.868217

    work page doi:10.1063/1.868217 1994

  66. [67]

    Monotonically integrated large eddy simulation of free shear flows

    C. Fureby and F. F. Grinstein. “Monotonically integrated large eddy simulation of free shear flows”. In:AIAA Journal37.5 (1999), pp. 544–556.doi:10.2514/2.772

    work page doi:10.2514/2.772 1999

  67. [68]

    On the implicit large eddy simu- lations of homogeneous decaying turbulence

    Ben Thornber, Andrew Mosedale, and Dimitris Drikakis. “On the implicit large eddy simu- lations of homogeneous decaying turbulence”. In:Journal of Computational Physics226.2 (2007), pp. 1902–1929.issn: 00219991.doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2007.06.030. 33

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2007.06.030 2007