MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131256161 · doi:10.1109/aps.2006.1710813

Frequency Dispersion Effects on FDTD Model for Breast Tumor Imaging Application

2006· article· en· W2131256161 on OpenAlexafffund
Abas Sabouni, Sima Noghanian, Stephen Pistorius

Bibliographic record

Venue2006 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society International Symposium · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodDebyeDispersion (optics)Lorentz transformationComputer scienceDebye modelTime domainAlgorithmFrequency domainApplied mathematicsPhysicsComputational physicsMathematicsMathematical analysisOpticsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the versatility of the frequency domain finite difference time domain (FD)2TD method in dealing with dispersive biological media. (FD)2TD is an extended version of the conventional FDTD that can handle dispersive materials more accurately. The conventional FDTD has been previously used for the modeling of biological tissues at a single frequency using constant material parameters. The frequency dependence of biological materials can be efficiently described in the time domain using standard Debye or Lorentz models. These models can be expressed in different orders. The higher order models can represent any arbitrary dispersive medium at the expense of computational cost and complexity. In order to maintain the simplicity of the method and to reduce computational cost, the first order Debye model is employed

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations7
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2006 IEEE Antennas and Propagation Society International SymposiumSame topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207