MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2066470351 · doi:10.1002/jnm.655

Cooperative particle swarm optimization of passive microwave devices

2007· article· en· W2066470351 on OpenAlex
Alireza Mahanfar, Stéphane Bila, Michel Aubourg, Serge Verdeyme

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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Numerical Modelling Electronic Networks Devices and Fields · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsParticle swarm optimizationConvergence (economics)Mathematical optimizationComputer scienceMulti-swarm optimizationFilter (signal processing)PopulationGridAlgorithmMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Particle swarm optimization (PSO) has lately become very popular in the electromagnetics domain. Although in some instances PSO shows a superior performance compared with other global optimization techniques, it is still computationally more expensive relative to classical gradient techniques. In this paper, a cooperative particle swarm optimization (CPSO) is adopted to achieve a faster convergence compared with the conventional PSO, while maintaining its main feature, which is the capability of finding global optimum. In order to deploy PSO more efficiently, the often neglected effect of the initial population on the overall convergence of PSO is discussed. It is shown that subdividing the space into grid cells and using random distribution within these cells will give the best results in terms of convergence speed. Different boundary conditions are tried on the CPSO algorithm. In order to verify the performance of the proposed algorithm, the algorithm is compared with the conventional PSO using six different objective functions. As a design example, an ultra‐wide‐band filter is designed. The results show a slightly faster convergence compared with the conventional PSO. The designed filter is fabricated and experimental results are also shown. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.218 · 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