MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163313189 · doi:10.1109/36.921419

Analysis of a three-dimensional dielectric mixture with finite difference method

2001· article· en· W2163313189 on OpenAlexaff
K. Kärkkäinen, Ari Sihvola, K. Nikoskinen

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicElectromagnetic Scattering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermittivityDielectricDielectric permittivityFinite difference methodMaterials scienceDistribution (mathematics)Relative permittivityMathematicsStatistical physicsComputational physicsMathematical analysisPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The present paper reports the results of a numerical analysis of electric fields in random dielectric materials. The effective permittivity of a three-dimensional (3D) dielectric mixture is calculated by the finite difference method. The results show the distribution of the effective permittivity of a mixture with different random inclusion positionings. New empirical mixing models are created as least squares approximations to fit the collection of numerical results. The calculated permittivity distribution is also compared with theoretical mixture models, showing that in case of clustered inclusions, the Bruggeman model is quite reasonable. On the other hand, if the inclusions in the mixture are separate, the results are closer to the Maxwell-Garnett model.

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)0.002
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 score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.240
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations174
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicElectromagnetic Scattering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207