MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205593217 · doi:10.1109/tap.2022.3140321

Corrections to “A Dissipation Theory for Three-Dimensional FDTD With Application to Stability Analysis and Subgridding” [Dec 18 7156-7170]

2022· article· en· W4205593217 on OpenAlexaff
Fadime Bekmambetova, Xinyue Zhang, Piero Triverio

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsType (biology)Interpolation (computer graphics)AlgorithmMathematicsApplied mathematicsComputer scienceTopology (electrical circuits)Artificial intelligenceCombinatoricsGeologyImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the above article <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">[1]</xref> , the interpolation conditions (42)–(45) are too restrictive and the proposed updated equation (57) does not ensure that these conditions hold simultaneously with (50) and (51). The update equation (57) proposed in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">[1]</xref> instead enforces a weaker interpolation condition at the interface between a coarse and a fine finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) grid, as discussed in this correction. It can be shown that this weaker condition is sufficient to ensure dissipativity of the system and that the update equations described in the original publication <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">[1]</xref> give rise to a stable subgridding algorithm. The only equations of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">[1]</xref> affected by this correction are (43a)–(43c), (61a)–(61c), (67), and (68). Also, the proofs in (47)–(49), (69), and (70) need to be updated accordingly, but the conclusion remains unchanged. All the other equations, theorems and numerical results in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="ref1" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">[1]</xref> are correct as stated in the manuscript.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and PropagationSame topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207