MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140402447 · doi:10.1109/tmtt.2006.873639

Efficient implementations of the Crank-Nicolson scheme for the finite-difference time-domain method

2006· article· en· W2140402447 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 Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodMathematicsDiscretizationMaxwell's equationsLimit (mathematics)Crank–Nicolson methodApplied mathematicsMatrix (chemical analysis)Sparse matrixFinite difference methodMathematical analysisFactorizationNumerical analysisAlgorithmPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When a finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) method is constructed by applying the Crank-Nicolson (CN) scheme to discretize Maxwell's equations, a huge sparse irreducible matrix results, which cannot be solved efficiently. This paper proposes a factorization-splitting scheme using two substeps to decompose the generalized CN matrix into two simple matrices with the terms not factored confined to one sub-step. Two unconditionally stable methods are developed: one has the same numerical dispersion relation as the alternating-direction implicit FDTD method, and the other has a much more isotropic numerical velocity. The limit on the time-step size to avoid numerical attenuation is investigated, and is shown to be below the Nyquist sampling rate. The intrinsic temporal numerical dispersion is discussed, which is the fundamental accuracy limit of the methods.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.271 · 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