Electromagnetic scattering by arbitrary shaped inhomogeneous impedance cylinder using physical optics method
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The electromagnetic scattering problem related to an arbitrarily shaped inhomogeneous impedance cylinder is investigated using the physical optics (PO) method. In the solution, induced electric and magnetic currents on the illuminated region of the impedance surface are expressed by means of the incident field and the inhomogeneous impedance boundary condition (IBC), then the scattered field is calculated using the Huygens‐type Green's formula. Obtained scattering width (SW) results are compared with those obtained by other analytical and numeric methods and good agreements are observed, especially for the monostatic case. Because of the fact that the PO method does not need matrix inversion, which requires high CPU time, the PO method also significantly reduces the computer calculation time according the other methods. In this study, the TM case is considered, but a similar procedure can be easily applied to TE case and also 3D inhomogeneous impedance objects. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microwave Opt Technol Lett 48: 1282–1286, 2006; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/mop.21625
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".