MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115198858 · doi:10.2528/pier06090506

AN EFFICIENT MODAL FDTD FOR ABSORBING BOUNDARY CONDITIONS AND INCIDENT WAVE GENERATOR IN WAVEGUIDE STRUCTURES

2007· article· en· W2115198858 on OpenAlexaff
Shuiping Luo, Zhizhang Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueElectromagnetic waves · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodModalGenerator (circuit theory)WaveguideAcousticsBoundary (topology)Boundary value problemPhysicsOpticsMaterials scienceMathematicsMathematical analysisPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When the finite-difference time-domain method is used to compute waveguide structures, incident waves are needed for calculating electrical parameters (e.g., the scattering parameters), and effective absorbing boundary conditions are required for terminating open waveguide structures.The incident waves are conventionally obtained with inefficient three-dimensional (3D) simulations of long uniform structures, while the absorbing boundary conditions reported so far do not perform well at or below cut-off frequencies.To address the problems, we propose a novel one-dimensional (1D) finitedifference time-domain method in this paper.Unlike the other methods developed so far, the proposed method is derived from the finite-difference time-domain formulation, and therefore has the same numerical characteristics as that of the finite-difference time-domain method.As a result, when used to obtain an incident wave, it produces results almost identical to those produced by the conventional finitedifference time-domain method except computer rounding-off errors.When used as the absorbing boundary condition, it produces reflections of less than -200 dB in entire frequency spectrum including the cut-off frequencies.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations11
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectromagnetic wavesSame topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207