MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4316021906 · doi:10.1109/jmmct.2023.3236946

Electromagnetic-Thermal Analysis With FDTD and Physics-Informed Neural Networks

2023· article· en· W4316021906 on OpenAlexafffund
Shutong Qi, Costas D. Sarris

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE journal on multiscale and multiphysics computational techniques · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsMultiphysicsFinite-difference time-domain methodSolverArtificial neural networkFinite difference methodFinite element methodComputer scienceElectromagnetic fieldInterfacingApplied mathematicsBoundary value problemPhysicsComputational scienceMathematicsMathematical optimizationMathematical analysisArtificial intelligenceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the coupling of the finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) method for electromagnetic field simulation, with a physics-informed neural network based solver for the heat equation. To this end, we employ a physics-informed U-Net instead of a numerical method to solve the heat equation. This approach enables the solution of general multiphysics problems with a single-physics numerical solver coupled with a neural network, overcoming the questions of accuracy and efficiency that are associated with interfacing multiphysics equations. By embedding the heat equation and its boundary conditions in the U-Net, we implement an unsupervised training methodology, which does not require the generation of ground-truth data. We test the proposed method with general 2-D coupled electromagnetic-thermal problems, demonstrating its accuracy and efficiency compared to standard finite-difference based alternatives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations35
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE journal on multiscale and multiphysics computational techniquesSame topicElectromagnetic Simulation and Numerical MethodsFrench-language works237,207