MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138131745 · doi:10.1109/tmtt.2009.2017344

A Compact 2-D Finite-Difference Frequency-Domain Method Combined With Implicitly Restarted Arnoldi Technique

2009· article· en· W2138131745 on OpenAlexaff
Feng Xu, Ke Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite difference methodFrequency domainAttenuationConstant (computer programming)Eigenvalues and eigenvectorsMathematicsFinite differenceMathematical analysisApplied mathematicsAlgorithmComputer sciencePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A compact 2-D finite-difference frequency-domain (FDFD) method is proposed to analyze the propagation characteristics of arbitrary guiding structures. Unlike other FDFD methods, which calculate the propagation constant for a given frequency, this method adopts the technique that is usually used in the compact 2-D finite-difference time-domain method, i.e., extracting the eigenfrequency based on an initial phase constant. Similar with other FDFD methods, this method will lead to a standard eigenvalue problem. However, the difference equations of this method are much simpler compared to the previous methods. When being combined with the implicitly restarted Arnoldi technique, this method can be used to simulate large-scale guided-wave problems due to the significantly increased speed of calculation and the greatly decreased memory requirement. Besides, by means of the concept of an equivalent resonator, the method can also be used to calculate the attenuation constant of arbitrary guiding structures.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and TechniquesSame topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207