MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904665126 · doi:10.1109/antem.2018.8572942

Maxwellian Fields and Geometry, Field Behaviour Near Region Boundaries and Sharp Discontinuities – a Review

2018· review· en· W2904665126 on OpenAlexaff
L. Shafai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClassification of discontinuitiesMathematical analysisWedge (geometry)GeometryIntegral equationSingularityCurvatureMathematicsBoundary value problemField (mathematics)Surface (topology)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The solution of Maxwell's equation is normally determined subject to boundary conditions, and conducting boundaries have the most influence on the field behaviors, especially near sharp discontinuities, where the transverse field components become singular. It is shown that if the region outside the boundary with curvature discontinuities is mapped onto a region with a smooth boundary the reciprocal of the metric coefficient of the transformation describes exactly the singular behavior of the field components near the surface discontinuities. This is shown first mathematically for a conducting wedge. Then, the problem of a TM scattering by the wedge and a conducting prism is investigated, and shown again the same relationship between the surface currents and the reciprocal of the transformation metric coefficients. This property is used to develop a new integral equation by eliminating the singularity of the surface current in the integral equation. This study also showed that the product of the prism surface current and the metric coefficient of the transformation behaved nearly the same as the surface current on a corresponding circular cylinder, an interesting geometrical relationship.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207