MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124624333 · doi:10.1109/temc.2020.3048704

3-D FDTD Method for Fast Calculation of Geomagnetic Storm Electromagnetic Fields

2021· article· en· W3124624333 on OpenAlexaff
Hossein Zamani, Keyhan Sheshyekani, Parisa Dehkhoda

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Electromagnetic Compatibility · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodCurvatureGeomagnetic stormEarth's magnetic fieldFinite difference methodComputational physicsPhysicsGeophysicsMagnetic fieldMathematicsMathematical analysisOpticsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, a 3-D finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) method is proposed for rigorous modeling and fast calculation of ultralow frequency geomagnetic storm electromagnetic fields (GS-EMFs). The proposed FDTD approach enables modeling of large-scale and complex 3-D earth structure (e.g., multilayer ground and earth curvature). Unlike conventional FDTD methods, the proposed FDTD method does not require extensive computational resources when dealing with ultralow frequency problems. In this article, the ground surface GS-EMFs produced by an electrojet (line current and sheet current sources) are compared with those obtained using the classical 1-D approaches for case of uniform and horizontally stratified ground. The effect of horizontally vertically multilayer ground and earth curvature on the GS-EMFs is evaluated by the proposed FDTD method. The presented results fully support the adequacy and efficiency of the proposed FDTD method for modeling of large-scale and complex 3-D earth structures for calculation of GS-EMFs.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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