Short note: Distinguishing correct from incorrect PML proposals and a corrected unsplit PML for anisotropic, dispersive media

  • Authors:

  • Ardavan Oskooi;Steven G. Johnson

  • Affiliations:

  • Center for Materials Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States and Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technolog ...;Center for Materials Science and Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, United States and Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technolog ...

  • Venue:
  • Journal of Computational Physics
  • Year:
  • 2011

Quantified Score

Hi-index 31.45

Visualization

Abstract

We show that some previous proposals for perfectly matched layer (PML) absorbers in anisotropic media or for waveguides at oblique incidence are not, in fact true PMLs; in previous work we similarly showed a failure of several PML proposals for periodic media (photonic crystals). We therefore argue that a more careful validation scheme is required for PML proposals, in contrast to past authors who have typically checked only that reflections are small for a fixed resolution, and suggest a simple validation scheme that can be readily applied to any PML proposal regardless of derivation or implementation. We demonstrate this test for a corrected, unsplit-field PML valid for anisotropic, dispersive media, implemented in both planewave-expansion and finite-difference time-domain (FDTD) methods.