MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977470020 · doi:10.1109/iceaa.2013.6632343

FDTD-Compatible broadband surface impedance boundary conditions for graphene

2013· article· en· W1977470020 on OpenAlexaff
Jason C. C. Mak, Costas D. Sarris

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrapheneFinite-difference time-domain methodBoundary value problemMaterials scienceElectrical impedanceSurface conductivityBroadbandConductivityComputer scienceOpticsNanotechnologyPhysicsMathematical analysisMathematicsTelecommunicationsElectrical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Graphene is a material that has been the focus of much academic interest for its unique material properties. As understanding of graphene improves and fabrication of graphene based devices matures, there is a growing need for electromagnetic simulations of graphene to aid device design. A finite-difference time domain (FDTD) model of graphene is useful for characterizing relevant geometries over a wide range of frequencies, yet limited by the excessive computational resources needed to model this essentially two-dimensional lossy, dispersive medium. A natural alternative is the use of a broadband surface impedance boundary condition (SIBC) that includes both the inter and the intraband conductivity of graphene. This SIBC is developed using a vector-fitting extracted rational function expansion of graphene's surface conductivity, mapped into the time-domain and implemented as a system of field update equations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations12
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207