MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101981096 · doi:10.1109/3.937391

A wavelet formulation of the finite-difference method: full-vector analysis of optical waveguide junctions

2001· article· en· W2101981096 on OpenAlexaff
Masafumi Fujii, W.J.R. Hoefer

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Quantum Electronics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurl (programming language)Finite difference methodStencilFinite-difference time-domain methodWaveguideMaxwell's equationsBeam propagation methodWaveletBoundary value problemBoundary (topology)Finite differenceComputer scienceMathematical analysisMathematicsPhysicsTopology (electrical circuits)OpticsComputational scienceRefractive index

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have developed an efficient, large-stencil finite-difference scheme of the time-dependent Maxwell's curl equations based on the wavelet-collocation formulation in the time-domain. The proposed scheme enables, for the first time within a limited computational resource, full-vector analysis of three-dimensional rib waveguides that are typically used in integrated planar optical devices. The formulation takes advantage of compactly-supported interpolating bases to expand and represent the electric and magnetic fields. Moreover, unlike the well-known beam propagation methods, the numerical scheme is based on the first-principle algorithm with no explicit approximation, and thus rigorous and versatile for various types of boundary conditions. We demonstrate the efficiency of the method by first analyzing a straight rib-waveguide and examining the convergence of the results. Then we investigate a Y-shaped junction structure that is electrically too large to analyze with the conventional finite-difference time-domain scheme.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Citations39
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Quantum ElectronicsSame topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207