MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3189229195 · doi:10.1109/tap.2022.3188403

A Parallel Boundary Element Method for the Electromagnetic Analysis of Large Structures With Lossy Conductors

2022· article· en· W3189229195 on OpenAlexafffund
Damian Marek, Shashwat Sharma, Piero Triverio

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicElectromagnetic Scattering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCompute CanadaAdvanced Micro Devices
KeywordsComputer scienceSolverScalabilityParallel computingBoundary element methodLossy compressionElectromagnetic fieldScheduling (production processes)Computational scienceMulti-core processorWorkloadElectrical conductorBoundary (topology)Finite element methodMathematical optimizationPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we propose an efficient parallelization strategy for the boundary element method (BEM) solvers that perform the electromagnetic analysis of structures with lossy conductors. The proposed solver is accelerated with the adaptive integral method, can model both homogeneous and multilayered background media, and supports excitation via lumped ports or an incident field. Unlike existing parallel BEM solvers, we use a formulation that rigorously models the skin effect, which results in two coupled computational workloads. The external-problem workload models electromagnetic coupling between conductive objects, while the internal-problem workload describes field distributions within them. We propose a parallelization strategy that distributes these two workloads evenly over thousands of processing cores. The external-problem workload is balanced in the same manner as existing parallel solvers that employ approximate models for conductive objects. However, we assert that the internal-problem workload should be balanced by algorithms from the scheduling theory. The parallel scalability of the proposed solver is tested on three different structures found in both integrated circuits and metasurfaces. The proposed parallelization strategy runs efficiently on distributed-memory computers with thousands of CPU cores and outperforms competing strategies derived from existing methods.

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 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 score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.264
Teacher spread0.255 · 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.

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

Citations6
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and PropagationSame topicElectromagnetic Scattering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207