MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163740454 · doi:10.1109/tmtt.2013.2253793

Parametric Modeling of Microwave Passive Components Using Sensitivity-Analysis-Based Adjoint Neural-Network Technique

2013· article· en· W2163740454 on OpenAlexaff
Sayed Alireza Sadrossadat, Yazi Cao, Qi‐Jun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensitivity (control systems)Artificial neural networkParametric statisticsParametric modelComputer scienceAlgorithmElectronic engineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel sensitivity-analysis-based adjoint neural-network (SAANN) technique to develop parametric models of microwave passive components. This technique allows robust parametric model development by learning not only the input-output behavior of the modeling problem, but also derivatives obtained from electromagnetic (EM) sensitivity analysis. A novel derivation is introduced to allow complicated high-order derivatives to be computed by a simple artificial neural-network (ANN) forward-back propagation procedure. New formulations are deduced for exact second-order sensitivity analysis of general multilayer neural-network structures with any numbers of layers and hidden neurons. Compared to our previous work on adjoint neural networks, the proposed SAANN is easier to implement into an existing ANN structure. The proposed technique allows us to obtain accurate and parametric models with less training data. Another benefit of this technique is that the trained model can accurately predict derivatives to geometrical or material parameters, regardless of whether or not these parameters are accommodated as sensitivity variables in EM simulators. Once trained, the SAANN models provide accurate and fast prediction of EM responses and derivatives used for high-level optimization with geometrical or material parameters as design variables. Three examples including parametric modeling of coupled-line filters, cavity filters, and junctions are presented to demonstrate the validity of this technique.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations105
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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