Finite-difference time-domain solution of light scattering by dielectric particles with large complex refractive indices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) technique is examined for its suitability for studying light scattering by highly refractive dielectric particles. It is found that, for particles with large complex refractive indices, the FDTD solution of light scattering is sensitive to the numerical treatments associated with the particle boundaries. Herein, appropriate treatments of the particle boundaries and related electric fields in the frequency domain are introduced and examined to improve the accuracy of the FDTD solutions. As a result, it is shown that, for a large complex refractive index of 7.1499 + 2.914i for particles with size parameters smaller than 6, the errors in extinction and absorption efficiencies from the FDTD method are generally less than approximately 4%. The errors in the scattering phase function are less than approximately 5%. We conclude that the present FDTD scheme with appropriate boundary treatments can provide a reliable solution for light scattering by nonspherical particles with large complex refractive indices.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".