Exact(12)
Assume that potential separation and blocking constraints have been omitted like described above and that k I = 2 ∀ I ∈ S, F = 1, 2, 3, 4, co ( I i ) = 0 ∀ i ∈ { 1, 2, 3 }, co ( { I i, I j } ) = 1 ∀ i, j ∈ { 1, 2, 3 }, co ( I 1, I 2, I 3 ) = 3. Obviously, every solution will induce an interference value strictly above zero, since at least two STRXs will interfere each other.
The cumulative distribution function of the resulting density of states is found to increase rapidly at a critical interference value.
The vector b k mj restricts then to a single interference value for each m.
From Figure5 we can see that the interference value decreases quickly with respect to the number of iterations.
Then compressive damage of epoxy matrix is observed with the increase of interference value, which is similar to the micrograph by experiment.
As a result the co-channel interference value within a STRX is already determined by the STRX structure and independent from the specific frequency assignment.
Similar(48)
Furthermore, the area under the density of states increases and shifts to lower interference values.
In this context, the interference values can be interpreted as costs or penalties as well.
In consequence, more (positive) interference values are taken into account in SFH compared to FAP.
The FullFEM reliability seems to be less sensible to interference values.
Although FAPH has smaller interference values per "link", see (1) and (2), this leads to an overall higher number of expected interference, therefore making a comparison by pure interference values misleading.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com