MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Realizing PEC boundary conditions on Lebedev grid

2017· article· en· W2766124505 on OpenAlexaff
Mahbod Salmasi, M.E. Potter, M. Okoniewski

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicElectromagnetic Scattering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHFSSGridInterpolation (computer graphics)PlanarAnisotropyBoundary value problemComputer scienceElectrical conductorPerfect conductorElectric fieldField (mathematics)ResonatorBoundary (topology)AcousticsMathematicsOpticsMathematical analysisPhysicsAntenna (radio)GeometryTelecommunicationsEngineeringElectrical engineeringScatteringMicrostrip antennaComputer graphics (images)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Lebedev method is a collocated scheme which makes it more suitable for modelling anisotropic materials compared to Yee method as it removes the need for interpolation since all the field components exist at one location. In this work, we accurately realize planar perfect electric conductors (PEC) and also PEC corners on Lebedev grid. To show the accuracy of the proposed method, a rectangular resonator filled with anisotropic material will be simulated, and the results will be compared with the previous method and HFSS.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.547
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectromagnetic Scattering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207