MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1543467190 · doi:10.1109/tap.2015.2438339

Efficient Electromagnetic Scattering Computation Using the Random Auxiliary Sources Method for Multiple Composite 3-D Arbitrary Objects

2015· article· en· W1543467190 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicElectromagnetic Scattering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoundary (topology)Method of moments (probability theory)SingularityComputationBoundary value problemScatteringMathematicsAlgorithmComputer scienceMathematical analysisApplied mathematicsTopology (electrical circuits)OpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The electromagnetic (EM) scattering problem from three-dimensional (3-D) arbitrary composite objects is proposed using the random auxiliary sources (RAS) method. Based on direct application of the boundary conditions with the uniqueness theorem and the use of random equivalent problems concept, more degrees-of-freedom to the sources' positions are added resulting in significantly efficient solutions with lower memory requirements. The technique does not require any singularity treatment due to placing the equivalent sources away from the boundaries. While boundary conditions are not enforced exactly, an iterative framework is introduced that can achieve an acceptable level of error in their satisfaction for an arbitrary, randomly generated set of equivalent sources. The presented technique promises a significant reduction in the execution time and memory requirements compared to the surface-equivalent-based method of moments (MoM). The solution stability, repeatability, and numerical noise susceptibility are investigated thoroughly through this work. Also, a novel edge correction scheme has been implemented to extend the capabilities of this procedure to structures with sharp edges. The results of the presented technique are compared to series solutions for conducting spheres and a commercially available MoM code for arbitrarily shaped objects and combinations of different materials.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.536
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.251 · 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