MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dispersion HIE-SF-FDTD Method for Simulating Graphene-Based Absorber

2022· article· en· W4283383292 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Moradi, Mohammad S. Sharawi, Ke Wu

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 16th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodGrapheneCartesian coordinate systemElectric fieldDispersion (optics)Computer scienceStability (learning theory)AlgorithmFinite difference methodComputational scienceMathematicsMaterials sciencePhysicsMathematical analysisOpticsGeometryNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel dispersion hybrid implicit explicit single-field finite-difference time-domain (HIE-SF-FDTD) method which can be effectively used to simulate the graphene-based absorber. The stability condition of the proposed method is relaxed from the spatial mesh sizes along one direction which makes it a robust tool to simulate structures having fine details in one Cartesian direction such as thin graphene sheet. By applying the Crank-Nicolson (CN) scheme only to the electric field and a new time-splitting scheme to the graphene current density, the proposed algorithm is developed. In this method, not alike most of the FDTD algorithms in which both electric and magnetic fields are updated, only the electric field needs to be solved in each iteration. Thanks to the few and simple updating equations of the proposed algorithm, higher computational efficiency in terms of runtime is achieved. The accuracy and computational efficiency of the proposed method are demonstrated through comparison of the results obtained from the methods available in the literature.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

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 venue2022 16th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP)Same topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207