MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088647994 · doi:10.1590/2179-10742020v19i3791

Error Analysis of the Numerical Method for Correcting the Propagation of EM waves in the Troposphere

2020· article· en· W3088647994 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Microwaves Optoelectronics and Electromagnetic Applications · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadio Wave Propagation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTroposphereError analysisPropagation of uncertaintyMathematicsGeologyMeteorologyStatisticsAtmospheric sciencesApplied mathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Electromagnetic (EM) waves do not travel in straight lines in the troposphere due to refraction. This leads to errors in many engineering applications. In order to correct these errors, a numerical solution based on the difference method has been proposed, which can reveal the degree of EM wave bending owing to atmospheric refraction, moreover, it can predict the actual path of the EM wave propagating in the troposphere. The error of the numerical method is studied here, which reveals the source of the error. Based on this, two improvement methods are proposed. The computational accuracy of the numerical methods is verified by comparison with the analytical solution. The proposed method ensures the computational efficiency and accuracy of the problem of refraction of EM waves in the troposphere.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.246 · 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