Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 51 references

TURB-Smoke. A database of Lagrangian pollutants emitted from point-sources and dispersed in turbulent flows

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper presents TURB-Smoke, a public DNS-based dataset of hundreds of millions of passive particles from five point sources in turbulence, with coarse-grained 3D and 2D concentrations at several wind strengths, as ground truth for…

desk verdict Useful public database for olfactory-search benchmarks, but the wind-case concentration fields inherit a periodic-box artifact that needs to be quantified before the 'realistic ground truth' claim can stand. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.22749 v1 pith:LZM3XIGE submitted 2025-07-30 physics.flu-dyn

Luca Biferale , Fabio Bonaccorso , Niccolò Cocciaglia , Robin A. Heinonen , Lorenzo Piro This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dyn
keywords turbulentdispersionLagrangianparticlesdirectnumericalsimulationodorsourcelocalizationolfactorysearchpassivetracersconcentrationfieldspointsources
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper introduces TURB-Smoke, a numerical dataset meant to fill a missing public resource for studying how pollutants and odors disperse in turbulent flows. The authors simulate the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations on a $512^3$ grid, then release hundreds of millions of passive Lagrangian tracer particles from five known point sources, with and without a constant mean wind. From the particle trajectories they construct coarse-grained three-dimensional concentration fields and quasi-two-dimensional concentration slabs. The intended use is to benchmark and train source-tracking strategies, including Bayesian infotaxis and reinforcement-learning agents, against a validated, reproducible ground truth rather than against heuristic plume models. The dataset is validated by showing that its Lagrangian velocity intermittency, measured by the fourth-order local slope, agrees with existing experiments and simulations.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the passive Lagrangian tracer particle governed by $dX(t)/dt = u(X(t),t)+U_0$, where $u$ is the velocity from a pseudospectral direct numerical simulation of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations and $U_0$ is a constant mean wind. Particles are emitted from five point sources in short puffs and removed after traveling ten domain lengths. Eulerian concentration fields are produced by coarse-graining particle counts onto rectangular grids, either in three dimensions or in a thin slab around the source plane; the same counting procedure generates both the 3D and 2D products, and interpolating particle positions to ten times the storage rate creates the higher-time-resolution 2D fields.

What would settle it

Run a direct numerical simulation of the same turbulent flow with a transported scalar at a realistic Schmidt number, or take wind-tunnel plume measurements under matching mean-wind-to-turbulence ratios, and compare the distribution of high-concentration event sizes and inter-hit times with the coarse-grained TURB-Smoke fields; a systematic mismatch at sensor-relevant scales would falsify the zero-diffusion ground-truth claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that TURB-Smoke supplies a realistic and validated reference database for contaminant dispersion and source localization. The flow is a statistically steady homogeneous isotropic turbulent field at a Taylor-scale Reynolds number of $Re_\lambda \approx 166$, maintained by large-scale forcing; particles are emitted in puffs of 1000 from five coplanar point sources and advected by $dX/dt = u(X(t),t)+U_0$, so the mean wind enters only through particle motion. The database contains Lagrangian trajectories at Kolmogorov-time resolution for winds $U_0/U_{rms} = 0, 2.05, 6.16$, three-dimensional coarse-grained concentrations for $U_0/U_{rms} = 2.05$, and two-dimensional slab concentrations for all five wind intensities, some with tenfold temporal interpolation. Validation against published Lagrangian intermittency measurements shows the tracer statistics are consistent with high-quality turbulence data, supporting the claim that the fields are a reliable test bed for search algorithms.

Load-bearing premise

The dataset's claim to be a realistic stand-in for contaminant dispersion rests on treating the pollutant as a passive tracer with zero molecular diffusion, so any real chemical whose diffusivity smooths the small-scale filaments seen by sensors would not be exactly reproduced.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Infotaxis, reinforcement-learning, and other olfactory-search policies can be trained and compared on identical, reproducible plume statistics with known source locations and controlled wind strengths.
  • Because the Lagrangian files label particles by source, multi-source problems such as discriminating between coexisting contaminant sources become directly testable.
  • The 2D interpolated fields at $\Delta t/10$ provide decision-scale information for agents whose actions are faster than the raw storage interval.
  • The zero-wind case isolates the effect of mean advection, allowing controlled studies of how wind strength changes plume structure and search difficulty.
  • The included executable and notebooks let other groups reproduce the DNS and reuse the processing pipeline for new runs.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Beyond the paper: treating the contaminant as a zero-diffusivity tracer means the fields have unrealistically sharp small-scale structure for chemicals with finite molecular diffusivity, so algorithms tuned on this dataset may overfit to gradient information that a real plume would not provide.
  • Beyond the paper: since only one wind intensity has 3D concentration fields, a natural extension is to release 3D fields for all five wind speeds so that three-dimensional search studies can vary mean advection.
  • Beyond the paper: the trajectory data could also support fundamental turbulence studies, such as Lagrangian pair dispersion or conditional statistics of concentration given local flow topology, which the dataset was not originally designed to answer.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. TURB-Smoke is a DNS-based public dataset of Lagrangian tracer particles released from five point sources in forced homogeneous isotropic turbulence, with zero or streamwise mean wind U0/Urms in {0, 1.03, 2.05, 4.11, 6.16}. The database stores particle trajectories, coarse-grained 3D and 2D concentration fields, and supporting code/notebooks. The technical validation focuses on the fourth-order Lagrangian velocity local slope, which is compared with independent experimental and numerical datasets and shows good agreement.

Significance. If the concerns below are addressed, this is a valuable community resource: it is public, documented, based on a standard pseudospectral DNS setup, and provides both Lagrangian trajectories and Eulerian concentration fields specifically tailored to olfactory and source-localization benchmarking. The validation against external Lagrangian intermittency data is a genuine strength, as is the provision of reproducibility scripts. The main value of the paper is therefore its role as a benchmark dataset, and the significance is moderate but real.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 2.2, Sec. 2.3, Table 3] The wind-case concentration fields are constructed from repeated periodic copies of the same instantaneous HIT snapshot, and the paper does not quantify the resulting artifact. Equation (4) explicitly allows particles to cross the periodic boundaries many times, and the text states that a particle at X(t) sees the same HIT field as one at X(t)+(iL,jL,kL). In the source-comoving frame, the downstream plume is therefore composed of periodic images of the same turbulent field every L. Since the 3D grid spans about 3.1 L and the 2D grids span up to about 2.4 L in the streamwise direction, the large-scale forcing modes (k <= 1.5) repeat exactly within the provided concentration fields. This injects artificial spatial correlations at multiples of L into exactly the statistics that source-localization benchmarks will use, weakening the 'realistic flows' ground-truth claim in the abstract. Please quantify this effect (for example, by comparing concentration statistics within the first period with those in downstream periods, or by identifying the regions affected) and state the limitation explicitly in the Data Records section.
  2. [Sec. 4] The technical validation addresses only Lagrangian velocity intermittency via the fourth-order local slope. The concentration fields, which are the central product for source-tracking users, are not directly validated. Since the abstract claims that TURB-Smoke provides a reliable ground-truth framework for contaminant dispersion, please add at least one independent check of the concentration statistics, e.g., mean plume spread and concentration fluctuations versus wind speed, a comparison against a scalar DNS or available plume dispersion data, or a convergence/resolution study of the coarse-grained fields.
  3. [Sec. 1 and Sec. 2.2, Eq. (4)] The treatment of pollutants as zero-diffusivity Lagrangian tracers is stated to neglect 'the relatively unimportant effect of molecular diffusion' without quantitative support. Because the database is proposed as ground truth for real contaminant plumes, please provide an estimate of the Schmidt/Péclet number regime sampled by the coarse-grained fields and explain why molecular diffusion is subdominant at the grid scale Delta ~ 12 dx, or alternatively document this as an explicit limitation of the 'realistic flows' claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 1] The claim that 'no such data are currently available to the public' is stronger than necessary; some public turbulence databases exist, and the novelty is better stated as being specifically about point-source odor/contaminant plumes with both Lagrangian and coarse-grained concentration fields.
  2. [Sec. 2.2 and Sec. 3] The periodic-replication property of the unwrapped trajectories and concentration grids should be documented for users in Data Records; currently it is only implicit in the Methods and could surprise benchmark users.
  3. [Sec. 2.1] The text says RUN1 and RUN2 are 'statistically equivalent' but no cross-run comparison is shown; a short comparison of a key statistic would help users trust the five-wind dataset.
  4. [Abstract and Sec. 3] The abstract says 'hundreds of millions of Lagrangian particles' but the Data Records section reports about 22.5 million particles in the latest zero-wind file; please clarify whether the former is the total emitted across all runs and times, and reconcile the numbers.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper is a data-description and validation study, with no fitted parameter presented as a prediction and no load-bearing self-citation.

full rationale

This is a data paper: its central deliverable is a DNS-generated database of Lagrangian trajectories and coarse-grained concentration fields, not a derived physical prediction. The governing equations (Eqs. 1 and 4) are standard Navier-Stokes and tracer-particle dynamics, with no free parameter tuned to any result that is then presented as an independent prediction. The validation in Section 4 compares the fourth-order Lagrangian local slope against an external compilation of experimental and DNS data (Arnèodo et al. [40] and Refs. [43-50]); this is genuine independent confirmation, not a self-referential check. The self-citations in the text ([20,22,23,27,39]) are cited as prior applications of the same dataset, not as evidence for its correctness or as the justification for any uniqueness claim. The statement that no public data are currently available is a novelty claim and does not feed back into any equation or validation step. Modeling choices such as treating pollutants as passive tracers with zero molecular diffusion (Section 1) and using a periodic domain with mean wind (Section 2.2) are boundary/assumption issues that affect realism or fidelity, but they do not constitute circularity: the database is not defined in terms of the quantities it claims to provide, and no output is forced by construction from an input. The periodic-boundary artifact noted in the skeptical reading is a physical-fidelity concern, not a circular-derivation concern. Accordingly, no circular step can be exhibited, and the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No parameters were fitted to achieve agreement; the simulation parameters define the dataset rather than being tuned to a target result. The central claim rests on standard turbulence modeling and a validation benchmark, with molecular diffusion neglected and the flow idealized.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Pollutants and odors can be represented as passive Lagrangian tracer particles with no molecular diffusion and no back-reaction on the flow.
    Invoked in Section 1 ('neglecting the relatively unimportant effect of molecular diffusion') and Section 2.2 (Eq. (4)), where particles are passive, noninteracting tracers; the entire concentration-field pipeline depends on this.
  • domain assumption A statistically stationary, homogeneous isotropic turbulent flow at Re_lambda=166, produced by large-scale stochastic forcing, is an adequate stand-in for natural turbulent dispersion environments.
    Section 2.1 and Table 1; the paper acknowledges the inertial range is limited and atmospheric Re is much higher, so realism is approximate.
  • standard math Imposing a constant wind U0 on particle velocities while keeping the underlying periodic HIT flow unchanged is equivalent to dispersion in a flow with uniform mean wind (Galilean invariance).
    Used in Section 2.2, Eq. (4), and in the data records description of the comoving frame; this is mathematically standard for a constant velocity boost.
  • domain assumption Trilinear or 6th-order B-spline interpolation of the spectral velocity field yields accurate Lagrangian trajectories.
    Section 2.2 cites van Hinsberg et al. for interpolation accuracy; no convergence study with resolution is reported in this paper.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of TURB-Smoke. A database of Lagrangian pollutants emitted from point-sources and dispersed in turbulent flows." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LZM3XIGE

@misc{pith2026250722749,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: TURB-Smoke. A database of Lagrangian pollutants emitted from point-sources and dispersed in turbulent flows},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LZM3XIGE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.22749}
}
read the original abstract

Identifying the location and characteristics of pollution sources in turbulent flows is challenging, especially for environmental monitoring and emergency response, due to sparse, stochastic, and infrequent cue detection. Even in idealized settings, accurately modeling these phenomena remains highly complex, with realistic representations typically achievable only through experimental or simulation-based data. We introduce TURB-Smoke, a cutting-edge numerical dataset designed for investigating odor and contaminant dispersion in turbulent environments with and without mean wind. Generated via direct numerical simulations of the fully resolved three-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations, TURB-Smoke tracks hundreds of millions of Lagrangian particles released from five distinct point sources in fully developed turbulence, thus providing a reliable ground-truth framework for developing and evaluating source-tracking strategies using stationary sensors or mobile agents in realistic flows. Each particle's trajectory is continuously tracked on many characteristic turbulence timescales, recording both the position and the local flow velocity. Additionally, we provide coarse-grained concentration fields in 3D and in quasi-2D slabs containing the source, ideal for quickly testing and optimizing search algorithms under varying flow conditions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.22749 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. (a) Time evolution of the mean kinetic energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Snapshot of the Lagrangian particles advected by the mean wind of intensity [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Representation of the filtering performed by the thin slab, used to obtain the 2D concentrations. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Three snapshots of the 2D concentration field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Fourth-order local slope ζ(4, τ /τη), computed as the component-wise average of the local slopes along i (see Eq. (6)). The result from our data (black filled circles) is compared with three experimental – EXP1 [43], EXP2 [44], EXP3 [45] in the legend – and five numeri…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 50 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Fernando, H. J. S.et al. Flow, turbulence, and pollutant dispersion in urban atmospheres.Phys. Fluids 22, 051301 (2010)

    work page 2010

  2. [2]

    González-Martín, J., Kraakman, N. J. R., Pérez, C., Lebrero, R. & Muñoz, R. A state–of–the-art review on indoor air pollution and strategies for indoor air pollution control.Chemosphere 262, 128376 (2021)

    work page 2021

  3. [3]

    & Niemann, H

    ten Hietbrink, S., Materić, D., Holzinger, R., Groeskamp, S. & Niemann, H. Nanoplastic concen- trations across the North Atlantic.Nature 643, 412–416 (2025)

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    & Chen, B

    Yang, M., Zhang, B., Xin, X., Lee, K. & Chen, B. Microplastic and oil pollution in oceans: Interactions and environmental impacts.Sci. Total Environ. 838, 156142 (2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Liu, X. et al. The threats of micro- and nanoplastics to aquatic ecosystems and water health.Nat. Water 3, 764–781 (2025)

    work page 2025

  6. [6]

    & Pozzer, A

    Lelieveld, J., Evans, J., Fnais, M., Giannadaki, D. & Pozzer, A. The contribution of outdoor air pollution sources to premature mortality on a global scale.Nature 525, 367–371 (2015)

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    Shraiman, B. I. & Siggia, E. D. Scalar turbulence.Nature 405, 639–646 (2000)

    work page 2000

  8. [8]

    Passive scalars in turbulent flows.Annu

    Warhaft, Z. Passive scalars in turbulent flows.Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 32, 203–240 (2000)

    work page 2000

Show all 51 references
  1. [9]

    & Vergassola, M

    Celani, A., Villermaux, E. & Vergassola, M. Odor landscapes in turbulent environments.Phys. Rev. X 4, 041015 (2014)

    2014

  2. [10]

    Reddy, G., Murthy, V. N. & Vergassola, M. Olfactory sensing and navigation in turbulent environments. Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 13, 191–213 (2022)

    2022

  3. [11]

    & Lürling, M

    Roozen, F. & Lürling, M. Behavioural response of Daphnia to olfactory cues from food, competitors and predators. J. Plankton Res. 23, 797–808 (2001)

    2001

  4. [12]

    Derby, C. D. & Weissburg, M. J. The chemical senses and chemosensory ecology of crustaceans. NHC 3, 263–92 (2014). 11

    2014

  5. [13]

    S., Carde, R

    Murlis, J., Elkinton, J. S., Carde, R. T.et al. Odor plumes and how insects use them.Annu. Rev. Entomol. 37, 505–532 (1992)

    1992

  6. [14]

    Schultz, E. F. & Tapp, J. T. Olfactory control of behavior in rodents.Psychol. Bull. 79, 21 (1973)

    1973

  7. [15]

    Thesen, A., Steen, J. B. & Døving, K. B. Behaviour of dogs during olfactory tracking.J. Exp. Biol. 180, 247–251 (1993)

    1993

  8. [16]

    & Vergassola, M

    Rigolli, N., Reddy, G., Seminara, A. & Vergassola, M. Alternation emerges as a multi-modal strategy for turbulent odor navigation.eLife 11, e76989 (2022)

    2022

  9. [17]

    & Shraiman, B

    Balkovsky, E. & Shraiman, B. I. Olfactory search at high Reynolds number.PNAS 99, 12589–12593 (2002)

    2002

  10. [18]

    & Celani, A

    Durve, M., Piro, L., Cencini, M., Biferale, L. & Celani, A. Collective olfactory search in a turbulent environment. Phys. Rev. E 102, 012402 (2020)

    2020

  11. [19]

    & Shraiman, B

    Vergassola, M., Villermaux, E. & Shraiman, B. I. ‘Infotaxis’ as a strategy for searching without gradients. Nature 445, 406–409 (2007)

    2007

  12. [20]

    A., Biferale, L., Celani, A

    Heinonen, R. A., Biferale, L., Celani, A. & Vergassola, M. Optimal policies for Bayesian olfactory search in turbulent flows.Phys. Rev. E 107, 055105 (2023)

    2023

  13. [21]

    & Celani, A

    Panizon, E. & Celani, A. Seeking and sharing information in collective olfactory search.Phys. Biol. 20, 065001 (2023)

    2023

  14. [22]

    A., Carbone, M., Biferale, L

    Piro, L., Heinonen, R. A., Carbone, M., Biferale, L. & Cencini, M. Policy heterogeneity improves collective olfactory search in 3-D turbulence. Preprint athttps://arxiv.org/abs/2504.11291 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  15. [23]

    A., Biferale, L., Celani, A

    Heinonen, R. A., Biferale, L., Celani, A. & Vergassola, M. Exploring Bayesian olfactory search in realistic turbulent flows.Phys. Rev. Fluids 10, 064614 (2025)

    2025

  16. [24]

    H., van Breugel, F., Rao, R

    Singh, S. H., van Breugel, F., Rao, R. P. N. & Brunton, B. W. Emergent behaviour and neural dynamics in artificial agents tracking odour plumes.Nat. Mach. Intell. 5, 58–70 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    & Seminara, A

    Rando, M., James, M., Verri, A., Rosasco, L. & Seminara, A. Q-learning with temporal memory to navigate turbulence.eLife 13, RP102906 (2025)

    2025

  18. [26]

    Biferale, L., Bonaccorso, F., Cocciaglia, N., Heinonen, R. A. & Piro, L. TURB-Smoke. Smart-TURB https://smart-turb.roma2.infn.it/init/routes/#/logging/view_dataset/ 9/tabmeta (2025)

    2025

  19. [27]

    A., Cencini, M

    Piro, L., Heinonen, R. A., Cencini, M. & Biferale, L. Many wrong models approach to localise an odour source in turbulence with static sensors.J. Turbul. 26, 153–173 (2025)

    2025

  20. [28]

    Kong, Y. et al. Locating hazardous chemical leakage source based on cooperative moving and fixing sensors. Sensors 19, 1092 (2019)

    2019

  21. [29]

    & Zayed, T

    Tariq, S., Hu, Z. & Zayed, T. Micro-electromechanical systems-based technologies for leak detection and localization in water supply networks: A bibliometric and systematic review.J. Clean. Prod. 289, 125751 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    H., Perić, M

    Ferziger, J. H., Perić, M. & Street, R. L.Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics (Springer Nature, 2020)

    2020

  23. [31]

    Sawford, B. L. Reynolds number effects in Lagrangian stochastic models of turbulent dispersion. Phys. Fluids A 3, 1577–1586 (1991). 12

    1991

  24. [32]

    Turbulence: the legacy of A

    Frisch, U. Turbulence: the legacy of A. N. Kolmogorov (Cambridge University Press, 1995)

    1995

  25. [33]

    & Biferale, L

    Alexakis, A. & Biferale, L. Cascades and transitions in turbulent flows.Phys. Rep. 767-769, 1–101 (2018)

    2018

  26. [34]

    van Hinsberg, M. A. T., Thije Boonkkamp, J. H. M., Toschi, F. & Clercx, H. J. H. On the efficiency and accuracy of interpolation methods for spectral codes.SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 34, B479–B498 (2012)

    2012

  27. [35]

    & Leoni, P

    Biferale, L., Bonaccorso, F., Buzzicotti, M. & Leoni, P. C. D. TURB-Rot: a large database of 3D and 2D snapshots from turbulent rotating flows. Preprint athttps://arxiv.org/abs/2006.07469 (2020)

    2020 arXiv

  28. [36]

    & Calascibetta, C

    Biferale, L., Bonaccorso, F., Buzzicotti, M. & Calascibetta, C. TURB-Lagr: a database of 3D Lagrangian trajectories in homogeneous and isotropic turbulence. Preprint athttps://arxiv. org/abs/2303.08662 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  29. [37]

    & Capocci, D

    Biferale, L., Bonaccorso, F., Linkmann, M. & Capocci, D. TURB-Hel: an open-access database of helically forced homogeneous and isotropic turbulence. Preprint athttps://arxiv.org/abs/ 2404.07653 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    & Linkmann, M

    Capocci, D., Biferale, L., Bonaccorso, F. & Linkmann, M. TURB-MHD: an open-access database of forced homogeneous magnetohydrodynamic turbulence. Preprint athttps://arxiv.org/abs/ 2504.10755 (2025)

    2025

  31. [39]

    A., Biferale, L., Celani, A

    Heinonen, R. A., Biferale, L., Celani, A. & Vergassola, M. Optimal trajectories for bayesian olfactory search in turbulent flows: The low information limit and beyond.Phys. Rev. Fluids 10, 044601 (2025)

    2025

  32. [40]

    Arnèodo, A. et al. Universal intermittent properties of particle trajectories in highly turbulent flows. Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 254504 (2008)

    2008

  33. [41]

    Lagrangian structure functions in turbulence: A quantitative comparison between experiment and direct numerical simulation.Phys

    Biferale, L.et al. Lagrangian structure functions in turbulence: A quantitative comparison between experiment and direct numerical simulation.Phys. Fluids 20, 065103 (2008)

    2008

  34. [42]

    Benzi, R. et al. Extended self-similarity in turbulent flows.Phys. Rev. E 48, R29–R32 (1993)

    1993

  35. [43]

    & Ott, S

    Berg, J., Lüthi, B., Mann, J. & Ott, S. Backwards and forwards relative dispersion in turbulent flow: An experimental investigation.Phys. Rev. E 74, 016304 (2006)

    2006

  36. [44]

    Xu, H., Bourgoin, M., Ouellette, N. T. & Bodenschatz, E. High order Lagrangian velocity statistics in turbulence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 024503 (2006)

    2006

  37. [45]

    & Pinton, J.-F

    Mordant, N., Metz, P., Michel, O. & Pinton, J.-F. Measurement of Lagrangian velocity in fully developed turbulence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 214501 (2001)

    2001

  38. [46]

    & Pinton, J.-F

    Mordant, N., Lévêque, E. & Pinton, J.-F. Experimental and numerical study of the Lagrangian dynamics of high Reynolds turbulence.New J. Phys. 6, 116 (2004)

    2004

  39. [47]

    & Müller, W

    Homann, H., Grauer, R., Busse, A. & Müller, W. C. Lagrangian statistics of Navier–Stokes and MHD turbulence. J. Plasma Phys. 73, 821–830 (2007)

    2007

  40. [48]

    & Toschi, F

    Biferale, L., Boffetta, G., Celani, A., Lanotte, A. & Toschi, F. Particle trapping in three-dimensional fully developed turbulence. Phys. Fluids 17, 021701 (2004)

    2004

  41. [49]

    Fisher, R. T.et al. Terascale turbulence computation using the FLASH3 application framework on the IBM Blue Gene/L system.IBM J. Res. Dev. 52, 127–136 (2008). 13

    2008

  42. [50]

    K., Pope, S

    Yeung, P. K., Pope, S. B. & Sawford, B. L. Reynolds number dependence of Lagrangian statistics in large numerical simulations of isotropic turbulence.J. Turbul. 7, N58 (2006)

    2006

  43. [51]

    https://opensource.org/license/bsd-3-clause (2025)

    Opensource.org. https://opensource.org/license/bsd-3-clause (2025). 14

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.