MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164423985 · doi:10.1109/mwsym.2009.5165700

FDTD lattice termination with periodic boundary conditions

2009· article· en· W2164423985 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodPeriodic boundary conditionsBoundary value problemPerfectly matched layerSineBoundary (topology)Trigonometric functionsMathematical analysisRefractive indexElectrical conductorLattice (music)Bandwidth (computing)ReflectivityMathematicsOpticsPhysicsComputer scienceGeometryAcousticsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The potential of periodic boundary conditions to provide an alternative method for terminating finite-difference time-domain lattices, instead of absorbing boundary conditions or perfectly matched layers, is examined in this paper. Employing a recent combination of the sine-cosine technique with the array-scanning method, a large number of problems of interest can be efficiently terminated at periodic boundaries, which effectively act as absorbers. Hence, a unified treatment of inhomogeneous, dispersive and conductive media, each of which requires a reformulation of the perfectly matched layer, is attained, with an excellent performance that is not compromised by the close proximity of a source to the boundary. In addition, while the reflectivity of perfectly matched layers increases when the refractive index of the working volume is a non-analytic function, the proposed approach is not affected. The presence of non-periodic boundary conditions can still be accounted for by hybrid periodic/absorbing terminations.

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)0.000
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.816
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.258 · 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