MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2925064799 · doi:10.1109/tmag.2019.2903008

Matrix-Free Nonlinear Finite-Element Solver Using Transmission-Line Modeling on GPU

2019· article· en· W2925064799 on OpenAlexafffund
Peng Liu, Jiacong Li, Venkata Dinavahi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Magnetics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSolverGraphics processing unitComputer scienceComputational scienceMassively parallelSpeedupFinite element methodMatrix (chemical analysis)Nonlinear systemAlgorithmParallel computingSparse matrixLU decompositionMatrix decompositionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transmission-line modeling (TLM) used for nonlinear finite-element (FE) solution has a paramount feature that the admittance matrix is unchanged and only needs one-time factorization; and this feature becomes a drawback when the required number of TLM iterations increase due to the mismatch between the transmission-line impedance and the load. In this paper, a matrix-free TLM scheme is proposed to make use of the solved nonlinear reluctivities without employing any matrices at each timestep, thus substantially decreasing the number of required TLM iterations. The matrix-free solver is suitable for massively parallel processing and the design is implemented on the Tesla V100 graphics processing unit (GPU). A speedup of more than 27 times is obtained compared with a commercial FE package for different problem sizes while maintaining high accuracy.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations14
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on MagneticsSame topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207