MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292348084 · doi:10.1109/tmtt.2022.3197806

Space–Time Adaptive Modeling and Shape Optimization of Microwave Structures With Applications to Metasurface Design

2022· article· en· W4292348084 on OpenAlexafffund
Qiming Zhao, Costas D. Sarris

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAcoustic Wave Phenomena Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDiscontinuous Galerkin methodKrigingComputer scienceAdaptive mesh refinementMathematical optimizationMicrowaveAlgorithmParametrization (atmospheric modeling)Computational scienceFinite element methodApplied mathematicsTopology (electrical circuits)MathematicsPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a time-domain modeling and shape optimization framework for microwave structures, including metasurfaces, based on a nodal discontinuous Galerkin time-domain (DGTD) method. In particular, we employ an unstructured mesh and the inherent mesh refinement ability of DGTD to model multiscale geometries via adaptive mesh refinement. More importantly, we integrate a multitier local time-stepping technique into the time integration of DGTD, which significantly alleviates the cost introduced by mesh refinement. We further present a flexible parameterization approach by defining the contours of metasurface unit cells by B-spline curves, which allows us to explore a wide range of smooth shapes by only a few design variables. Besides, we adopt a polynomial chaos-Kriging (PCK) surrogate method to approximate the full-wave DGTD model, reducing the computational cost for optimization problems that require time-consuming simulations by three orders of magnitude. The B-spline parameterization and the PCK surrogate model are combined with a pattern search-based Pareto front algorithm to optimize metasurfaces for multiple design objectives. The proposed optimization framework is also applicable to other microwave structures. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach through the optimization of an omega-bianisotropic Huygens’ metasurface unit cell and an <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$E$ </tex-math></inline-formula> -plane microwave T-junction.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score0.726

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and TechniquesSame topicAcoustic Wave Phenomena ResearchFrench-language works237,207