The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Verification of Codes and Calculations
Abstract
Background discussion, definitions, and descriptions are given for some terms related to confidence building in computational fluid dynamics. The two principal distinctions made are between verification vs validation and between verification of codes vs verification of individual calculations. Also discussed are numerical errors vs conceptual modeling errors; iterative convergence vs grid convergence (or residual accuracy vs discretization accuracy); confirmation, calibration, tuning, and certification; error taxonomies; and customer illusions vs customer care. Emphasis is given to rigorous code verification via systematic grid convergence using the method of manufactured solutions, and a simple method for uniform reporting of grid convergence studies using the Grid Convergence Index (GCI). Also discussed are surrogate single-grid error indicators.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Horgan, J. (1995) · Scientific American · doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0695-104 · Cited by 407
Metadata
- Authors
- Roache, P. J.
- Venue
- AIAA Journal
- Published
- 1998-05
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 696-702
- ISSN
- 0001-1452 (ISSN-L)
- 1533-385X
- OpenAlex
- W2127931614
- Cited by
- 679
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 7.42
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Verification of Codes and Calculations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2514/2.457
- The paper
- Roache, P. J. (1998). Verification of Codes and Calculations. AIAA Journal. https://doi.org/10.2514/2.457
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
