Modes analyses of cylindrical waveguides using the MFCM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An efficient modes analyses technique for isotropic or anisotropic material filled 2D metallic waveguides with an arbitrary contour using the multifilament current method (MFCM) is presented. The ideal PEC boundary of a 2D waveguide is replaced by a shell with a high conductivity and electrical small thickness. The thin lossy shell not only can well approximate the boundary condition of PEC waveguide wall therefore without altering the initial waveguide modes, but also can let the external excitation penetrate through to excite the inside modes, resulting in a high internal field intensity at the frequency of each mode. In this case, the modes are revealed by the peaks of field intensity responses, and the spurious modes which existed in traditional source‐free modes determination techniques can be completely avoided. Based on this idea, a generalized impedance boundary condition (GIBC) is formulated to represent the lossy waveguide wall and further utilized in the MFCM for simulating the internal field intensity over frequency. Three different configurations of a 2D waveguide are considered. The computed modes are compared with that obtained from commercial software, and an excellent agreement is achieved, yet an competitive advantage on simulation performances is observed by using the proposed technique.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".