MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2282404933 · doi:10.2528/pier15090403

THE TIME-HARMONIC DISCONTINUOUS GALERKIN METHOD AS A ROBUST FORWARD SOLVER FOR MICROWAVE IMAGING APPLICATIONS

2015· article· en· W2282404933 on OpenAlexafffund
Ian Jeffrey, Nicholas Geddert, Kevin G. Brown, Joe LoVetri

Bibliographic record

VenueElectromagnetic waves · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Manitoba
KeywordsDiscontinuous Galerkin methodMicrowaveSolverMicrowave imagingHarmonicGalerkin methodComputer sciencePhysicsMathematicsMathematical optimizationAcousticsFinite element methodTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Novel microwave imaging systems require flexible forward solvers capable of incorporating arbitrary boundary conditions and inhomogeneous background constitutive parameters.In this work we focus on the implementation of a time-harmonic Discontinuous Galerkin Method (DGM) forward solver with a number of features that aim to benefit tomographic microwave imaging algorithms: locally varying high-order polynomial field expansions, locally varying high-order representations of the complex constitutive parameters, and exact radiating boundary conditions.The DGM formulated directly from Maxwell's curl equations facilitates including both electric and magnetic contrast functions, the latter being important when considering quantitative imaging with magnetic contrast agents.To improve forward solver performance we formulate the DGM for time-harmonic electric and magnetic vector wave equations driven by both electric and magnetic sources.Sufficient implementation details are provided to permit existing DGM codes based on nodal expansions of Maxwell's curl equations to be converted to the wave equation formulations.Results are shown to validate the DGM forward solver framework for transverse magnetic problems that might typically be found in tomographic imaging systems, illustrating how high-order expansions of the constitutive parameters can be used to improve forward solver performance.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations16
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectromagnetic wavesSame topicMicrowave Imaging and Scattering AnalysisFrench-language works237,207