MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Preliminary Comparison of MLFMA and $\mathcal{H}$-matrix Acceleration of Locally Corrected Nyström Solutions to Scattering Problems

2023· article· en· W4375947170 on OpenAlexaff
Vladimir Okhmatovski, Ian Jeffrey

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicElectromagnetic Scattering and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAccelerationMatrix (chemical analysis)Integral equationDiscretizationIterative methodElectric-field integral equationMultipole expansionApplied mathematicsField (mathematics)MathematicsMathematical analysisPhysicsAlgorithmQuantum mechanicsPure mathematicsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fast solutions of scattering problems with Multi-Level Fast Multipole Method (MLFMM) and$\mathcal{H}$-matrix accelerated Locally Corrected Nyström (LCN) discretization of the Electric Field Integral Equation (EFIE), Magnetic Field Integral Equation (MFIE), and Combined Field Integral Equation (CFIE), are discussed and compared in terms of their CPU time usage. Fast iterative solutions of the matrix equations resulting from LCN discretizations of the EFIE and MFIE enabled with MLFMM acceleration of the matrix-vector products have been observed to require heavy preconditioning for realistic targets due to poor conditioning of the pertinent matrices. The application of sufficiently effective near field preconditioning can be comparable in complexity to solving the original matrix equation.$\mathcal{H}$-matrix acceleration scheme enables direct solution of the pertinent matrix equation but exhibit a high cost associated with$\mathcal{H}-\text{LU}$decomposition. Preliminary comparisons of these two iterative and non-iterative acceleration strategies is provided in this work.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElectromagnetic Scattering and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207