MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293198592 · doi:10.1109/tmag.2022.3161814

Physics Informed Neural Networks for Electromagnetic Analysis

2022· article· en· W4293198592 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Magnetics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicModel Reduction and Neural Networks
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPartial differential equationSolverElectromagneticsFinite element methodArtificial neural networkComputer scienceApplied mathematicsComputational electromagneticsPhysical lawBoundary value problemBoundary element methodFunction (biology)Deep learningPhysicsArtificial intelligenceElectromagnetic fieldMathematicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep learning has achieved remarkable success in diverse applications; however, its use in solving partial differential equations (PDEs) has emerged only recently. Here, we present a feasibility study of applying physics-informed deep learning methods for solving PDEs related to the physical laws of electromagnetics. The methodology uses automatic differentiation, and the loss function is formulated based on the underlying PDE and boundary conditions. The feasibility of the method is shown using three electromagnetic problems of varying complexity and the results show close agreement with the ground truth from a finite-element analysis solver. The application of transfer learning is also explored and results in faster training. Furthermore, a hybrid approach involving physics-based governing equations and labeled data is also introduced to improve the accuracy of the results.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
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 score0.963
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.234 · 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