MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2121517139 · doi:10.1109/mwsym.2005.1516869

The complex envelope (CE) ADI-FDTD method

2005· article· en· W2121517139 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE MTT-S International Microwave Symposium Digest, 2005. · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodEnvelope (radar)Stability (learning theory)MicrowaveDispersion (optics)Computer scienceMathematicsPhysicsOpticsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To efficiently simulate modulated electromagnetic fields, the complex envelope (CE) concept has been adapted into the FDTD method. However, such formulated CE FDTD has been found inferior to the conventional FDTD method and of little practical values due to the CFL stability condition. Therefore, attempts have been made to adapt the CE concept to the unconditionally stable ADI-FDTD method. In this paper, the full-wave CE ADI-FDTD formulations are presented with the unconditional stability. Numerical dispersion analysis and numerical experiments are performed, showing that the CE-ADI-FDTD is superior to the ADIFDTD and is comparable to the conventional FDTD in terms of accuracy. Therefore, it offers an alternative timedomain modeling technique for RF/microwave structures especially for modulated signals.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.285
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