MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586234594 · doi:10.1109/tmtt.2017.2650904

Parametric Modeling of Microwave Components Using Adjoint Neural Networks and Pole-Residue Transfer Functions With EM Sensitivity Analysis

2017· article· en· W2586234594 on OpenAlexafffund
Feng Feng, Venu-Madhav-Reddy Gongal-Reddy, Chao Zhang, Jianguo Ma, Qi‐Jun Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTransfer functionParametric statisticsControl theory (sociology)Parametric modelSensitivity (control systems)Artificial neural networkPole–zero plotMathematicsBiological systemComputer scienceEngineeringElectronic engineeringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper proposes a pole-residue-based adjoint neuro-transfer function (neuro-TF) technique with electromagnetic (EM) sensitivity analysis for parametric modeling of EM behavior of microwave components with respect to changes in geometrical parameters. The purpose is to increase model accuracy by utilizing EM sensitivity information and to speed up model development by reducing the number of training data required for developing the model. The proposed parametric model consists of original and adjoint pole-residue based neuro-TF models. New formulations are derived for calculating the second-order derivatives for training the adjoint pole-residue-based neuro-TF model. An advanced pole-residue tracking technique is proposed to exploit the sensitivity information to track the splitting of poles as geometrical parameters change. This pole-residue tracking technique allows the model to bridge the differences of the orders of transfer function over different regions of the geometrical parameters, and ultimately form smooth and continuous functions between the pole/residues and the geometrical variables. The proposed technique addresses the challenges of tracking pole splitting when training data are limited. By exploiting the sensitivity information, the proposed technique can speed up the model development process over the existing pole-residue parametric modeling method which does not use sensitivity analysis.

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)0.000
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations101
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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