Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 27 references

Frequency-Domain Analysis of Wave Scattering by Spatially Dispersive Metasurfaces Using the Method of Auxiliary Sources

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-07-31 · grok-4.5

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Extended GSTCs can be built into the Method of Auxiliary Sources, giving a meshless solver for angle-dependent metasurface scattering.

desk verdict Solid meshless discretization of known extended GSTCs; useful CEM tooling, not new physics, and the multi-geometry benchmarks hold up. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.28558 v1 pith:63DRUZS4 submitted 2026-07-30 physics.optics physics.comp-ph

Minas Kouroublakis , Nikolaos L. Tsitsas , Yehuda Leviatan This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticsphysics.comp-ph
keywords metasurfacesspatialdispersiongeneralizedsheettransitionconditionsmethodofauxiliarysourcesmeshlessmethodsLorentzresonatorsscattering
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Spatially dispersive metasurfaces respond differently at different angles, so ordinary local surface models miss important physics. This paper folds the extended GSTCs that carry spatial derivatives of the fields into the Method of Auxiliary Sources, producing a meshless frequency-domain framework called MAS-SD. The same idea is worked out for infinite and finite planar sheets, open polygons, semicircles, and closed cylinders, and is stated to cover bianisotropic cases as well. Validation against Lorentz-type resonators shows field patterns that match published integral-equation and full-wave data. A sympathetic reader cares because the method avoids surface meshing, stays simple to code for curved and edged shapes, and is presented as the needed intermediate step before space–time modulated surfaces.

What carries the argument

MAS-SD: the Method of Auxiliary Sources with extended GSTCs. Auxiliary electric or magnetic filaments radiate the reflected and transmitted fields; the non-local GSTC operators (including discrete second spatial derivatives of field jumps and averages) are collocated at matching points to form a linear system for the filament amplitudes.

What would settle it

Recompute the published Lorentz finite-planar, semicircular, polygonal, and closed-cylinder benchmarks with the stated source counts and derivative stencils; if the total-field cuts or residual boundary error systematically diverge from the IE-GSTC-SD and HFSS references beyond the claimed agreement, the central claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that the extended GSTCs for spatially dispersive metasurfaces can be enforced inside the Method of Auxiliary Sources by placing discrete auxiliary filaments on auxiliary contours and matching the differential boundary operators at surface points. The resulting MAS-SD formulation accurately reproduces scattering for Lorentz-type planar, polygonal, semicircular, and cylindrical metasurfaces, in very good agreement with prior IE-GSTC-SD and HFSS results, and supplies a meshless alternative that also applies in principle to bianisotropic spatially dispersive sheets.

Load-bearing premise

That ordinary finite-difference second derivatives and the usual empirical rules for placing auxiliary sources near edges still represent the non-local GSTC operators accurately enough for the method to stay reliable.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Infinite and finite planar, polygonal, semicircular, and closed cylindrical spatially dispersive sheets can be analyzed without meshing the contour.
  • The same MAS placement rules extend, by the paper’s claim, to anisotropic and bianisotropic spatially dispersive GSTCs.
  • Residual boundary-condition error below a few percent becomes a practical stopping criterion for choosing source and match counts.
  • The frequency-domain MAS-SD construction is positioned as the intermediate step needed before a space–time modulated MAS treatment.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the second-derivative stencils remain stable near edges, MAS-SD could become a quick design loop for finite metasurface apertures where BEM meshing is the bottleneck.
  • The same auxiliary-source layout may carry over to weakly nonlinear or multi-frequency Lorentz models without changing the geometry rules.
  • Open curved and polygonal cases already treated here suggest a path to irregular closed shells once a consistent interior/exterior source scaling is fixed.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper integrates extended GSTCs for spatially dispersive metasurfaces into the Method of Auxiliary Sources, yielding a meshless MAS-SD frequency-domain solver. Extended GSTCs arise from rational (here Lorentz-type) models of angle-dependent surface susceptibilities and involve second spatial derivatives of field jumps and averages. Geometry-specific auxiliary-source layouts and matching-point placements are given for infinite planar, finite planar, open polygonal, semicircular, and closed cylindrical metasurfaces; the resulting impedance systems (e.g., Eqs. 28–32, 40) are solved and residual boundary error e is driven below 5%. Validation reproduces field maps and line cuts from prior IE-GSTC-SD work and one HFSS comparison for Lorentz/MIM resonators across the claimed geometries.

Significance. If the reported agreement holds, MAS-SD supplies a simple meshless alternative to BEM-based IE-GSTC-SD for spatially dispersive sheets of both open and closed shape, with clear value for rapid parametric studies and as a stepping stone toward space–time modulated metasurfaces. Strengths include explicit impedance blocks for the isotropic Lorentz case, a concrete residual stopping criterion, and genuine cross-method checks against independent published solvers rather than self-generated oracles. The formulation is flexible across several canonical geometries that are otherwise awkward to mesh.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract, §I, §II-B] Abstract and §I assert that the formulation is “general and also applicable to bianisotropic spatially dispersive metasurfaces,” yet §II-B explicitly defers the bianisotropic extended GSTCs (“will not be shown in this work”) because distinct rational denominators prevent a straightforward spatial-domain transform. All numerical examples remain isotropic Lorentz/MIM. Either supply the bianisotropic impedance construction (or a minimal numerical demonstration) or narrow the claim to the anisotropic/isotropic operators actually derived and validated.
  2. [§III-E–F, Eqs. (24)–(25), (34)–(36)] §III-F replaces the second-derivative operators in the extended GSTCs (24)–(25) by standard second-order finite-difference stencils (central interior, one-sided at ends) on uniformly spaced matching points, while auxiliary placements follow empirical non-dispersive rules [26], [27]. No truncation-error, spacing-convergence, or edge-local residual study is given for these non-local operators. Because the central claim rests on accurate enforcement of derivative GSTCs near edges and curvature, a brief convergence check (e.g., e and a field cut versus dm or Ne) for at least one edged geometry would substantially strengthen the numerical foundation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§III–IV] Notation for auxiliary counts and matching sets (Nm1/Nm2, Ne1/Ne2, Mm, Me) is introduced piecewise; a short summary table of source/matching counts and offsets used in each numerical example would aid reproducibility.
  2. [§IV figures] Fig. 8–13 captions and axis labels mix meters and normalized units; consistent wavelength-normalized axes (or explicit f, λ) would improve readability.
  3. [§IV-B and throughout] Typographical inconsistencies appear (e.g., “ΜΙΜ” with Greek capitals, “wo” vs “w0”, occasional missing spaces in χ/ξ subscripts). A copy-edit pass is warranted.
  4. [§II-A] The claim that normal polarization components may be neglected is stated without a quantitative thickness/wavelength bound; a one-sentence reference to the regime of validity would help.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: MAS-SD is a genuine cross-method re-solve of external GSTC-SD benchmarks, not a self-defined prediction.

full rationale

The paper’s load-bearing claim is methodological: embed the extended (spatially dispersive) GSTCs of Gupta et al. into the Method of Auxiliary Sources and show that the resulting meshless solver reproduces published field distributions for Lorentz-type resonators on planar, polygonal, semicircular, and cylindrical geometries. The extended GSTC operators, Lorentz coefficients (χ, ξ, a0, β0, ζ0, …), geometries, and frequencies are imported from independent IE-GSTC-SD/HFSS studies [13]–[17]; MAS-SD then re-discretizes those same boundary-value problems with auxiliary filaments and finite-difference second derivatives and compares line cuts and field maps. Agreement with those external oracles is a genuine cross-method check, not a fit renamed as prediction. Self-citations ([18]–[23], [26], [27]) supply standard MAS placement heuristics and prior non-dispersive/time-domain MAS background; they do not supply the benchmark values or force the reported scattering patterns by construction. Bianisotropic generality is asserted but not exercised—that is a scope limit, not circularity. No equation reduces a claimed prediction to its own fitted input, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors is used to forbid alternatives. Score 0 is therefore appropriate.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The physical model (extended GSTCs, Lorentz rational susceptibilities) is imported wholesale from cited literature. The paper’s own load is the MAS representation, discrete derivative enforcement, and empirical source/matching layouts. Free parameters are mostly discretization knobs and coefficients taken from prior unit-cell fits, not re-fit here. No new physical entities are postulated.

free parameters (4)
  • Auxiliary-surface offsets (d_aux, x_aux=±λ/4, σ_aux^(1,2)) = e.g. ±λ/4 planar; σ=0.9/1.1 closed cylinder
    Hand-chosen distances of fictitious source contours from the physical sheet; accuracy of MAS depends on these choices.
  • Source and matching counts N1,N2,M and spacings d_aux, d_m = geometry-dependent; threshold e<5%
    Increased until residual e<5%; values differ per geometry (e.g. 303, 151, 400+160).
  • Lorentz / MIM susceptibility coefficients (χ, ξ, a0, β, ζ, …) = as tabulated per example (e.g. f=60 GHz, 10 GHz, 120 GHz cases)
    Taken from prior unit-cell fits in [14],[16], not derived in this work; they fully set the SD response being solved.
  • Edge-extension source counts Ne and empirical edge clustering = e.g. Ne1=Ne2=160 finite planar; 120 semicircle
    Placement near edges follows empirical rules of [26],[27] rather than a derived optimum.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Zero-thickness GSTCs with normal polarization terms neglected relate field jumps to tangential surface polarizations P, M.
    Stated in Sec. II-A after Eqs. (1)–(2); standard when thickness ≪ λ.
  • domain assumption Spatial dispersion is captured by rational polynomial susceptibilities in transverse wavenumber, yielding extended GSTCs with spatial derivatives (Lorentz specialization to second order).
    Imported from [13]–[17]; Sec. II-B–C. Underpins all boundary operators used in MAS-SD.
  • domain assumption Scattered fields in each region equal fields of discrete auxiliary electric/magnetic filaments in homogeneous media (MAS completeness/approximation assumption).
    Sec. III; classical MAS/SMT hypothesis.
  • ad hoc to paper Second derivatives in extended GSTCs may be replaced by standard second-order finite-difference stencils on uniformly spaced matching points.
    Sec. III-F; necessary to close the algebraic system but not error-analyzed for the non-local operators.
  • ad hoc to paper For isotropic Lorentz resonators, only one polarization of auxiliary filaments is required; anisotropic/bianisotropic coupling can be omitted without loss of methodological generality.
    Sec. II-B and III opening; bianisotropic spatial-domain GSTCs are explicitly not derived.
invented entities (1)
  • MAS-SD formulation (geometry-specific auxiliary layouts + extended-GSTC impedance blocks) independent evidence
    purpose: Name and organize the meshless discretization that enforces extended GSTCs inside MAS for SD metasurfaces.
    Not a new physical object; a named numerical scheme. Independent evidence is the cross-check against IE-GSTC-SD/HFSS field data.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Frequency-Domain Analysis of Wave Scattering by Spatially Dispersive Metasurfaces Using the Method of Auxiliary Sources." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/63DRUZS4

@misc{pith2026260728558,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Frequency-Domain Analysis of Wave Scattering by Spatially Dispersive Metasurfaces Using the Method of Auxiliary Sources},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/63DRUZS4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.28558}
}
read the original abstract

Spatially dispersive metasurfaces exhibit angle-dependent responses that cannot be accurately modeled using conventional local susceptibilities. Extended Generalized Sheet Transition Conditions (GSTCs) have been introduced to account for spatial dispersion by incorporating spatial derivatives of the electromagnetic fields. In this work, these extended GSTCs are integrated into the Method of Auxiliary Sources (MAS), resulting in a meshless simulation framework for the analysis of spatially dispersive metasurfaces. The proposed formulation is developed for infinite planar, finite planar, polygon shaped, and cylindrical metasurfaces, while it is general and also applicable to bianisotropic spatially dispersive metasurfaces. For validation, the numerical examples consider Lorentz-type spatial resonators, consistent with previously published studies. The extended GSTCs are enforced within the MAS via appropriate placement of auxiliary sources. Numerical results are presented for several geometries, including planar, polygonal, semicircular, and cylindrical metasurfaces. The obtained results show very good agreement with previously published data, demonstrating the accuracy and flexibility of the proposed method.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.28558 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A spatially dispersive metasurface is illuminated by an [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. A spatially dispersive planar metasurface in the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. A spatially dispersive circular cylindrical metasurface. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (10 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Application of MAS-SD on an infinite planar metasurface [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Application of MAS-SD on a finite planar metasurface ex [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Application of MAS-SD for the (a) semicircular cylindrical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Application of MAS-SD for an open polygonal cylindrical [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: In both cases, the obtained fields are very similar [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Real part of the scattered electric field, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Real part of the scattered electric field [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (a) shows the total electric field magnitude, which can be compared with the corresponding spatially non￾dispersive case of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Total electric field magnitude |Etot z | for the semicircular cylindrical metasurface excited by a plane wave: (a) spatially dis￾persive, (b) spatially non-dispersive case. Scattered fields on (c) a semicircle in R1 with ro = 0.055 m centered at (0, 0) and (d) a circl…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: (a) shows the total electric field magnitude, com￾pared with the spatially nondispersive case in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_13.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [14]

    Spatially dispersive metasurfaces—Part II: IE-GSTC-SD field solver with extended GSTCs,

    T. J. Smy, J. G. N. Rahmeier, J. Dugan, and S. Gupta, “Spatially dispersive metasurfaces—Part II: IE-GSTC-SD field solver with extended GSTCs,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 71, no. 7, pp. 5920–5934, 2022

    2022

  2. [16]

    Field scattering analysis of cylindrical spatially disper- sive metasurfaces,

    ——, “Field scattering analysis of cylindrical spatially disper- sive metasurfaces,” IEEE Antennas Wireless Propag. Lett., vol. 22, no. 11, pp. 2619–2623, 2023

    2023

  3. [26]

    Analysis of electromagnetic scat- tering from a slot-perforated conducting cylindrical shell using a multifilament current model,

    Y. Leviatan and M. Haller, “Analysis of electromagnetic scat- tering from a slot-perforated conducting cylindrical shell using a multifilament current model,” J. Electromagn. Waves Appl., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 59–74, 1991

    1991

  4. [27]

    Two-dimensional scattering from homogeneous anisotropic cylinders using a multifilament current method,

    K. Wang, J.-J. Laurin, and K. Wu, “Two-dimensional scattering from homogeneous anisotropic cylinders using a multifilament current method,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 3889–3899, 2020

    2020

  5. [1]

    Achouri and C

    K. Achouri and C. Caloz, Electromagnetic Metasurfaces: The- ory and Applications. John Wiley & Sons, 2021

    2021

  6. [2]

    Electromagnetic metasurfaces and reconfigurable metasurfaces: A review,

    S. Zahra, L. Ma, W. Wang, J. Li, D. Chen, Y. Liu, Y. Zhou, N. Li, Y. Huang, and G. Wen, “Electromagnetic metasurfaces and reconfigurable metasurfaces: A review,” Front. Phys., vol. 8, p. 593411, 2021

    2021

  7. [3]

    A beam-steering antenna with a fluidically programmable metasurface,

    A. H. Naqvi and S. Lim, “A beam-steering antenna with a fluidically programmable metasurface,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 67, no. 6, pp. 3704–3711, 2019

    2019

  8. [4]

    Intelligent beam steering for wireless communication using programmable meta- surfaces,

    N. Ashraf, T. Saeed, H. Taghvaee, S. Abadal, V. Vassiliou, C. Liaskos, A. Pitsillides, and M. Lestas, “Intelligent beam steering for wireless communication using programmable meta- surfaces,” IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 4848–4861, 2023

    2023

Show all 27 references
  1. [5]

    Design of single- layer polarization-dependent transmissive and reflective focus- ing metasurface,

    J. L. Wu, Y. M. Pan, and S. Y. Zheng, “Design of single- layer polarization-dependent transmissive and reflective focus- ing metasurface,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 69, no. 11, pp. 7637–7646, 2021

    2021

  2. [6]

    An optically transparent near-field focusing metasurface,

    L. Li, P. Zhang, F. Cheng, M. Chang, and T. J. Cui, “An optically transparent near-field focusing metasurface,” IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Techn., vol. 69, no. 4, pp. 2015–2027, 2021

    2015

  3. [7]

    A review of anomalous refractive and reflective metasurfaces,

    S. Liu, Z. Ma, J. Pei, Q. Jiao, L. Yang, W. Zhang, H. Li, Y. Li, Y. Zou, and X. Tan, “A review of anomalous refractive and reflective metasurfaces,” Nanotechnol. Precis. Eng., vol. 5, no. 2, 2022

    2022

  4. [8]

    Surface susceptibility synthesis of metasurface holograms for creating electromagnetic illusions,

    T. J. Smy, S. A. Stewart, and S. Gupta, “Surface susceptibility synthesis of metasurface holograms for creating electromagnetic illusions,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 93 408–93 425, 2020

    2020

  5. [9]

    Efficient beamforming and radiation pattern control using stacked intelligent metasurfaces,

    N. U. Hassan, J. An, M. D. Renzo, M. Debbah, and C. Yuen, “Efficient beamforming and radiation pattern control using stacked intelligent metasurfaces,” IEEE Open J. Commun. Soc., vol. 5, pp. 599–611, 2024

    2024

  6. [10]

    General metasurface synthesis based on susceptibility tensors,

    K. Achouri, M. A. Salem, and C. Caloz, “General metasurface synthesis based on susceptibility tensors,” IEEE Trans. Anten- nas Propag., vol. 63, no. 7, pp. 2977–2991, 2015

    2015

  7. [11]

    Generalized sheet transition conditions (GSTCs) in electromagnetic metasurface modeling,

    A. Ghaneizadeh and M. Joodaki, “Generalized sheet transition conditions (GSTCs) in electromagnetic metasurface modeling,” IEEE Access, vol. 12, pp. 74 305–74 326, 2024

    2024

  8. [12]

    A homogenization tech- nique for obtaining generalized sheet-transition conditions for a metafilm embedded in a magnetodielectric interface,

    C. L. Holloway and E. F. Kuester, “A homogenization tech- nique for obtaining generalized sheet-transition conditions for a metafilm embedded in a magnetodielectric interface,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 64, no. 11, pp. 4671–4686, 2016

    2016

  9. [13]

    Zero thickness surface susceptibilities and extended GSTCs—Part I: Spatially dispersive metasurfaces,

    J. G. N. Rahmeier, T. J. Smy, J. Dugan, and S. Gupta, “Zero thickness surface susceptibilities and extended GSTCs—Part I: Spatially dispersive metasurfaces,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 71, no. 7, pp. 5909–5919, 2023

    2023

  10. [15]

    Spatially dispersive metasurfaces—Part III: Zero-thickness modeling of periodic and finite nonuniform surfaces,

    J. Dugan, J. G. N. Rahmeier, T. J. Smy, and S. Gupta, “Spatially dispersive metasurfaces—Part III: Zero-thickness modeling of periodic and finite nonuniform surfaces,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 71, no. 7, pp. 5935–5945, 2023

    2023

  11. [17]

    Surface susceptibility synthesis of spatially dispersive metasurfaces for space compression and spatial signal processing,

    J. Dugan, T. J. Smy, F. Monticone, and S. Gupta, “Surface susceptibility synthesis of spatially dispersive metasurfaces for space compression and spatial signal processing,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 72, no. 8, pp. 6572–6583, 2024

    2024

  12. [18]

    The method of auxiliary sources (MAS) in computational electro- magnetics: A comprehensive review of advancements over the past two decades,

    P. J. Papakanellos, N. L. Tsitsas, and H. T. Anastassiu, “The method of auxiliary sources (MAS) in computational electro- magnetics: A comprehensive review of advancements over the past two decades,” Electronics, vol. 13, no. 17, 2024

    2024

  13. [19]

    Analysis of 2-D transient electromagnetic shielding using the method of auxiliary sources,

    M. Kouroublakis, N. L. Tsitsas, and Y. Leviatan, “Analysis of 2-D transient electromagnetic shielding using the method of auxiliary sources,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 74, no. 4, pp. 3420–3430, Apr. 2026

    2026

  14. [20]

    Generalized formulations for electromagnetic scattering from perfectly conducting and homogeneous material bodies-theory and numerical solution,

    Y. Leviatan, A. Boag, and A. Boag, “Generalized formulations for electromagnetic scattering from perfectly conducting and homogeneous material bodies-theory and numerical solution,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 36, no. 12, pp. 1722–1734, 1988

    1988

  15. [21]

    A. H. D. Cheng, C. S. Chen, and A. Karageorghis, An Intro- duction to the Method of Fundamental Solutions. Singapore: World Scientific, 2025

    2025

  16. [22]

    Simulation of cylindrical metasurfaces using GSTC-MFCM,

    K. Wang, J.-J. Laurin, Q. Zhang, M. A. M. Hassan, Q. Zhang, and K. Wu, “Simulation of cylindrical metasurfaces using GSTC-MFCM,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 263–272, 2020

    2020

  17. [23]

    A time- domain method of auxiliary sources for analyzing transient elec- tromagnetic interactions with GSTC-modeled metasurfaces,

    M. Kouroublakis, N. L. Tsitsas, and Y. Leviatan, “A time- domain method of auxiliary sources for analyzing transient elec- tromagnetic interactions with GSTC-modeled metasurfaces,” 2026, arXiv:2605.08047 [physics.comp-ph]

    2026 arXiv

  18. [24]

    Pseudorandom sequence (space–time- modulated) metasurfaces: Principles, operations, and applica- tions,

    X. Wang and C. Caloz, “Pseudorandom sequence (space–time- modulated) metasurfaces: Principles, operations, and applica- tions,” IEEE Antennas Propag. Mag., vol. 64, no. 4, pp. 135– 144, 2022

    2022

  19. [25]

    Floquet analysis of space–time modulated metasurfaces with Lorentz dispersion,

    V. Tiukuvaara, T. J. Smy, and S. Gupta, “Floquet analysis of space–time modulated metasurfaces with Lorentz dispersion,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 69, no. 11, pp. 7667–7678, 2021

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed July 31, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.