MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2592790630 · doi:10.1109/antem.2004.7860592

Single boundary integral equation for static fields in the presence of penetrable bodies

2004· article· en· W2592790630 on OpenAlexaff
I.R. Ciric

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicElectromagnetic Scattering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntegral equationElectric-field integral equationMathematical analysisBoundary (topology)Polarization (electrochemistry)Boundary value problemDielectricMathematicsField (mathematics)Summation equationLaplace's equationPhysicsClassical mechanicsQuantum mechanicsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Laplacian electrostatic fields in the presence of dielectric bodies are usually analyzed using an integral equation for the density of the polarization charge over their surfaces. The advantage of this equation consists in its computational efficiency for systems of homogeneous bodies and in that the potential and the field intensity are calculated everywhere by employing elementary Coulombian formulas. In this paper, however, a single-source boundary integral equation is derived using the Green representation of the potential outside the dielectric bodies, a single surface source representation of the potential inside the bodies, and applying the boundary conditions. The formulation presented is important since it can easily be extended to structures containing layered bodies to derive a boundary integral equation substantially more efficient than the existent equations. Based on field analogies, the results obtained for electrostatic fields can directly be translated for other static fields in the presence of penetrable bodies.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectromagnetic Scattering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207