MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161889610 · doi:10.1109/jlt.2010.2043055

A Unified FDTD Lattice Truncation Method for Dispersive Media Based on Periodic Boundary Conditions

2010· article· en· W2161889610 on OpenAlexaff
Dongying Li, Costas D. Sarris

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Lightwave Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodTruncation (statistics)Perfectly matched layerBoundary value problemPeriodic boundary conditionsMathematical analysisFinite difference methodMathematicsOpticsLattice (music)Boundary (topology)Refractive indexPhysicsAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A unified treatment for the truncation of finite-difference time-domain lattices, applicable to dispersive and conductive media alike, is proposed. The method is based on periodic boundary conditions, hence necessitating that the medium under study be periodic along the direction of truncation. When this condition (which is satisfied in many practical cases) is met, a much simpler but equally effective alternative to the PML is provided by the combination of periodic boundaries with an array-scanning method. The proposed formulation does not need any additional auxiliary variables when applied to dispersive media, unlike the PML. Applications include a Bragg filter and a negative-refractive-index super lens.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Lightwave TechnologySame topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207