MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2117367253 · doi:10.1109/tmtt.2005.862663

Sensitivity analysis of network parameters with electromagnetic frequency-domain simulators

2006· article· en· W2117367253 on OpenAlexafffund
Natalia K. Nikolova, Jiang Zhu, Dongying Li, Mohamed H. Bakr, J.W. Bandler

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)SolverFEKOComputationComputer scienceOverhead (engineering)Frequency domainComputational electromagneticsElectromagneticsComputational scienceFinite difference methodAlgorithmElectronic engineeringMathematicsSoftwareElectromagnetic fieldMathematical analysisEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new practical approach to sensitivity analysis of the network parameters of high-frequency structures with commercial full-wave electromagnetic (EM) solvers is proposed. We show that the computation of the linear-network parameter derivatives in the design-parameter space does not require an adjoint-problem solution. The sensitivities are computed outside the EM solver, which simplifies the implementation. We discuss: 1) features of commercial EM solvers which allow the user to compute network parameters and their sensitivities through a single full-wave simulation; 2) the accuracy of the computed derivatives; and 3) the overhead of the sensitivity computation. Through examples based on FEMLAB and FEKO simulations, comparisons are made with the forward finite-difference derivative estimates in terms of accuracy and CPU time.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations79
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and TechniquesSame topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207