MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126345873 · doi:10.1145/3401895.3401934

Nvidia CUDA parallel processing of large FDTD meshes in a desktop computer

2020· article· en· W3126345873 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodCUDAComputer scienceComputational scienceMATLABGraphics processing unitParallel computingPolygon meshGraphicsGeneral-purpose computing on graphics processing unitsComputer graphics (images)AlgorithmOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Finite Difference in Time Domain numerical (FDTD) method is a well know and mature technique in computational electrodynamics. Usually FDTD is used in the analysis of electromagnetic structures, and antennas. However still there is a high computational burden, which is a limitation for use in combination with optimization algorithms. The parallelization of FDTD to calculate in GPU is possible using Matlab and CUDA tools. For instance, the simulation of a planar array, with a three dimensional FDTD mesh 790x276x588, for 6200 time steps, takes one day -elapsed time- using the CPU of an Intel Core i3 at 2.4GHz in a personal computer, 8Gb RAM. This time is reduced 120 times when the calculation is parallelized and carried out in a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 11264 MB GDDR 5X. The elapsed time is reduced substantially, but also the simplicity of calculation and usefulness of a Matlab implementation. The elapsed time reduction is so substantial that the FDTD-Matlab-CUDA can be combined with optimization algorithms.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.770
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.251 · 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