MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148535129 · doi:10.1109/tmtt.2002.807840

Absorbing boundary conditions for adjoint problems in the design sensitivity analysis with the FDTD method

2003· article· en· W2148535129 on OpenAlexaff
Y.S. Rickard, N. Georgieva, Hon-Wah Tam

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerfectly matched layerAdjoint equationFinite-difference time-domain methodBoundary value problemMathematicsVariable (mathematics)Mathematical analysisBoundary (topology)Self-adjoint operatorSensitivity (control systems)Applied mathematicsPartial differential equationPhysicsOpticsElectronic engineeringHilbert spaceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, absorbing boundary conditions (ABCs) for adjoint problems with a backward time variable are derived from first principles. It is shown that all single-layer ABCs for the adjoint backward time problem, which are based on the one-way wave equation, have the same form as for the original forward time problem. In the case of the adjoint perfectly matched layer (PML) ABC, the signs before the spatial derivatives are opposite to those in the PML ABC of the original forward time problem. To verify the theoretical findings, the numerical reflections from the adjoint ABCs are investigated in a microstrip-line example. The reflections from the ABCs of the forward- and backward time schemes are shown to be identical for the same type of ABCs.

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)0.006
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 score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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