MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977087197 · doi:10.1049/iet-map.2010.0546

Generalised formulation for electromagnetic scattering from finite arbitrarily shaped grooves in a perfect conducting plane

2011· article· en· W1977087197 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Abd Alkhalik Basha, S.K. Chaudhuri, Safieddin Safavi‐Naeini

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Microwaves Antennas & Propagation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicOptical Coatings and Gratings
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScatteringFinite element methodBoundary value problemPlane waveMatrix (chemical analysis)Mathematical analysisElectromagnetic fieldPlane (geometry)Near and far fieldField (mathematics)PhysicsMathematicsOpticsGeometryMaterials scienceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents an analytical-based solution of electromagnetic plane wave scattering from a finite number of general-shaped grooves in a perfectly conducting plane. The formulation, for the near as well as far-field, is based on Fourier-integral representation of the scattered field and stair-case approximation of the grooves' fields. An efficient formulation of the scattering matrix based on hierarchical and modular formulations, which combines the boundary conditions between fields in groove layers and upper half space is demonstrated. The scattering matrix construction consists of two levels of matrices. The first level of matrices is the individual grooves scattering matrices and the coupling matrices between grooves. The second level of the matrices contains all the geometrical and physical parameters of the grooves as well as the incident field. The near and far-field results of finite rectangular and isosceles right triangle (IRT) grooves are in excellent agreement with a solution from high frequency simulation software, a finite-element simulator and previously published results. The proposed method is able to optimise finite asymmetric gratings for optical and terahertz applications.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.799

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Microwaves Antennas & PropagationSame topicOptical Coatings and GratingsFrench-language works237,207