Model Order Reduction For Delayed PEEC Models With Guaranteed Accuracy and Observed Stability
Model Order Reduction For Delayed PEEC Models With Guaranteed Accuracy and Observed Stability
Model Order Reduction For Delayed PEEC Models With Guaranteed Accuracy and Observed Stability
Abstract— In this work, a stable and accurate model order function is only satisfied for the approximate transfer function.
reduction method for large-scale partial element equivalent In [12], a physics-based MOR method for PEEC circuits is
circuit (PEEC) models with many delays is proposed. The method proposed. The method presented in [13] is a direct mesh-based
reduces the dimension of the original model by interpolating the
original transfer function. The interpolation points are iteratively MOR method. Both the works in [12] and [13] are limited to
selected using a greedy algorithm. An efficient error estimator for quasi-static problems.
the reduced transfer function makes the greedy algorithm very In [14], a parameterized MOR technique for circuits
successful in both, properly selecting the interpolation points and described by the delayed PEEC method is presented.
tightly measuring the error of the reduced transfer function. The An implicit multiparameter moment matching algorithm is
resulting reduced-order model is accurate both in the frequency
and in the time domain. Numerical tests have shown that the used for the moments related to the design parameters. The
reduced-order model successfully filters the instability behavior parameterized reduced-order model (ROM) is constructed only
of the original model and exhibits stability over a large time at a fixed frequency. Many ROMs must be constructed for
interval. many different frequency samples. Inverse Laplace transform
Index Terms— Partial element equivalent circuit (PEEC) is applied to the frequency domain solution to obtain the time-
method, model order reduction, greedy algorithm, error domain response, which requires a second-stage approxima-
estimation. tion: truncating a Padé approximation.
In a recent work [15], the original transfer function is
not approximated before MOR. A reduced transfer function
I. I NTRODUCTION which interpolates the original transfer function at iteratively
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4178 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 69, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2022
true error of the reduced transfer function. Thirdly, the ROMs The unknown vector is:
are not only accurate but also stable in the time domain.
In contrast to the L∞ -error, the new error estimator is a x(t) = [i (t) φsr (t) φi (t) v d (t) qs (t)]T ∈ nu ×1 ,
more intuitive and straightforward error measure. Due to the
tightness of the error estimator, the greedy algorithm converges where i (t) represents the branch currents, φsr (t) the scalar
in only a few iterations by selecting a few interpolation points potentials for surface nodes, φi (t) the scalar potentials for
in a very wide frequency band. The ROM accurately catches internal nodes, v d (t) the excess capacitance voltages for
the behavior of the FOM in both the frequency domain and dielectric branches and qs (t) the surface charges [8]. The state
the time domain. Finally, we construct a single ROM for the space matrices E, A and B are:
PEEC model, which is accurate for all the frequencies in the ⎡ ⎤
frequency domain of interest. Our time domain response is L p(Q S) 0 0 0 0
n b ×n ns n b ×n ni n b ×n bd n b ×n p
obtained by directly simulating the ROM in the time domain ⎢ n b ×n b ⎥
⎢ 0 0 0 0 ⎥ MT
without a second stage of approximation [14]. ⎢ n ns ×n b n ns ×n ns n ns ×n ni n ns ×n bd ⎥ n ns ×n p
⎢ ⎥
Compared to our proceedings paper [18], this work con- ⎢ 0 0 0 0 0 ⎥
E =⎢ n ni ×n b n ni ×n ns n ni ×n ni n ni ×n bd n ni ×n p ⎥ ,
tributes most of the numerical analysis which is missing ⎢ ⎥
⎢ 0 0 0 Cd 0 ⎥
in [18]. New contributions of this work include: the adaptation ⎢ n bd ×n b n bd ×n ns n bd ×n ni n bd ×n bd n bd ×n p ⎥
⎣ ⎦
of an error estimator from [17] to time-delayed PEEC models 0 0 0 0 0
n p ×n b n p ×n ns n p ×n ni n p ×n bd n p ×n p
is explored. Numerically computing the error estimator is ⎡ ⎤
detailed. Instability of the ROMs obtained by the method −R −As −Ai − 0
×n ×n ×n ×n ×n
in [15] is observed and empirically improved. Numerical ⎢ n b b n b ns n b ni n b bd n b p
⎥
⎢ A T −G le 0 0 0 ⎥
comparison with the method in [15] in both frequency-domain ⎢ s n ×n nns ×n ⎥
ni n ns ×n bd n ns ×n p ⎥
⎢ nns ×nb ns ns
and time-domain is provided. The proposed algorithm is tested ⎢ AT ⎥
A=⎢
⎢ nni ×ni 0 0 0 0 ⎥
n ni ×n ns n ni ×n ni n ni ×n bd n ni ×n p ⎥ ,
on two more PEEC models with up to 191 delays and some ⎢ Tb ⎥
16,000 degrees of freedom. ⎢ 0 0 0 0 ⎥
⎢ nbd ×nb nbd ×n ns n bd ×n ni n bd ×n bd n bd ×n p ⎥
The paper is organized as follows. In Section II, we describe ⎣ ⎦
0 M 0 0 −P (Q S)
the PEEC method and the time-delayed PEEC model under n p ×n b n p ×n ns n p ×n ni n p ×n bd n p ×n p
consideration. In Section III, the proposed method is discussed ⎡ ⎤
I 0
in detail. We first introduce a greedy algorithm for delayed ⎢ nb ×nb n b ×n ns
⎥
⎢ 0 I ⎥
PEEC models. Then instability of the method in [15] is ⎢ nns ×nb n ns ×n ns ⎥
⎢ ⎥
analyzed and improved. A new error estimator in [17] is B =⎢ 0
⎢ nni ×nb
0 ⎥,
n ni ×n ns ⎥
extended to time-delayed PEEC models based on which a new ⎢ 0 0 ⎥
⎢ n ×n ⎥
greedy algorithm is proposed. More details on computing the ⎣ bd b n bd ×n ns ⎦
error estimator for MOR of the delayed PEEC models are 0 0
n p ×n b n p ×n ns
addressed. Section IV presents numerical tests of the proposed
greedy algorithm on three large-scale delayed PEEC models where n b , n ns , n ni , n bd and n p represent the number of
with hundreds of delays. Behavior of the ROMs in both branches, surface nodes, internal nodes, dielectric cells and
frequency domain and time domain are compared with the surface cells, respectively. Furthermore, L p(Q S) and P (Q S) are
ROMs obtained from the algorithms in [15]. Conclusions are the quasi static partial inductance and coefficients of potential
given in Section V. matrices where propagation delays have been neglected, Cd
II. D ELAYED PEEC M ODELS is the excess capacitance matrix, R is the branches resistance
The PEEC method is an integral equation - based method matrix, As is the incidence matrix for the surface nodes, Ai is
which solves Maxwell’s equations using the electric field the incidence matrix for the internal nodes, is the dielectric
integral equation and the continuity equation [8], [19]–[21]. region selection matrix, M is the surface to node reduction
Several different formulations have been proposed through the matrix and G le is the load conductance matrix (assuming for
years for the PEEC method. Each formulation is characterized simplicity of notation that only resistive lumped elements are
by a different set of variables which may confer particular connected to the PEEC model). The source vector u(t) is:
numerical properties to the model. Since we need to keep
v (t)
explicit the propagation delays for both partial inductances and u= s ,
potential coefficients, the choice which better fits our needs is i s (t)
the one proposed in [22].
where v s (t) and i s (t) are the voltage and current sources
A. Brief Introduction to the PEEC Method which are applied to branches and nodes, respectively. In this
In this subsection, we briefly present the PEEC method formulation, the surface charges qs are kept as unknowns
in [22], based on which we derive our time-delayed PEEC avoiding the inversion of the potential coefficients matrix
models in the next subsection. The modified nodal analy- P (Q S). It is also worth observing that the proposed PEEC for-
sis (MNA) form of the adopted formulation is: mulation, based on separate charge and current basis functions,
d x(t) demonstrates favorable low-frequency behavior, as confirmed
E = Ax(t) + Bu(t). in [23], [24].
dt
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
FENG et al.: MOR FOR DELAYED PEEC MODELS WITH GUARANTEED ACCURACY AND OBSERVED STABILITY 4179
B. Time-Delay Formulation of the PEEC Model C. MOR for the Delayed PEEC Model
When propagation delays are considered and modeled as A ROM of the delayed PEEC model, which has the
center to center delays between the spatial support of basis same delays as the original system, can be obtained via
functions, partial inductances L p and coefficients of potential Petrov-Galerkin projection using two projection matrices
P are expanded in the time domain as W, V , i.e.,
d
d
Ê j ż(t − τ j ) = Â j z(t − τ j ) + B̂u(t),
L p(t) = L p j δ(t − τ j ),
j =0 j =0
j =0
ŷ(t) = Ĉ z(t), ∀ t ≥ 0, (5)
d
P(t) = P j δ(t − τ j ), (1) where Ê j = EjV ∈
WT Â j = Rr×r ,
AjV ∈ B̂ =
WT Rr×r ,
j =0 W T B ∈ Rr×m , Ĉ = C V ∈ R p×r , with r n being the
where δ(t) denotes the delta Dirac function and 0 = τ0 < order of the ROM. The original state vector x(t) in (3) can be
τ1 < . . . < τd represent a set of significant delays. Delay τ0 = recovered by the approximation: x(t) ≈ V z(t). The transfer
0 occurs in the self (diagonal) terms and for basis functions function of the ROM is
for which the center to center delay is smaller than the time Ĥ (s) = Ĉ K̂−1 (s) B̂,
step and account for instantaneous magnetic and electric field
interactions. where K̂(s) = s dj =0 Ê j e−sτ j − dj =0 Â j e−sτ j . In [15], the
The expressions of L p(t) and P(t) in (1) imply that following interpolation property for delay systems is proved.
matrices E and A are decomposed in the Laplace domain as Proposition 1: Let a delay system be given by E 0 , . . . , E d ,
A0 , . . . , Ad , τ1 , . . . , τd , B, C and let s0 ∈ C be a fixed
d
−sτ j
K0 (s0 ) = s0 e−s0 τ j E j − e−s0 τ j A j ,
A(s) = Aje . (2) j =0 j =0
j =0
d
(−τ j )k−1 −s0 τ j
(−τ j )kd
When matrices E(s) and A(s) in (2) are transformed back Kk (s0 ) = e E j + s0 e−s0 τ j E j
(k − 1)! k!
to the time domain and applied to the unknown vector x(t), j =0 j =0
the following time-delay formulation of the PEEC model is
d
(−τ j )k
obtained: − e−s0 τ j A j ∀ k ≥ 1,
k!
j =0
d
E j ẋ(t − τ j ) = A j x(t − τ j ) + Bu(t), which satisfies K(σ ) = ∞ k=0 Kk σ , with s = s0 + σ . Here
k
−1
Fk (s0 ) = −k!K0 (s0 ) Kk−i Fi ,
of the delay system.
i=0
Equations (3) are a set of delayed differential equations
of the neutral type (NDDE). They can be solved by the G 0 (s0 ) = (K0 (s0 ))−T C T ,
k−1
Lobatto III-C method that provides a numerical solution which
−T T
is accurate to order 2 for the differential equation scheme, G k (s0 ) = −k!(K0 (s0 )) Kk−i (s0 ) G i .
i=0
as shown in [25]. Accurate time domain simulations for
delayed PEEC circuits have also been obtained using the Let V, W ∈ Cn×r be projection matrices and Ĥ be the transfer
backward Euler formulas [22], [26], [27]. It should be pointed function of the corresponding ROM.
out that the PEEC method is able to reproduce the DC solution • If F0 (s0 ), . . . , Fl (s0 ) ∈ Range(V ), then
better than other integral equation-based techniques, like the H (i) (s0 ) = Ĥ (i) (s0 ) ∀ i = 0, . . . , l.
Method of Moments (MoM) [28] by virtue of the fact that
it keeps the charges and currents effects separate, making it • If G 0 (s0 ), . . . , G k (s0 ) ∈ Range(W ), then
more robust than the MoM in relation to the low frequency c T H (i) (s0 ) = c T Ĥ (i)(s0 ) ∀ i = 0, . . . , k.
breakdown problem [24].
The transfer function of the delay system is defined as: • If F0 (s0 ), . . . , Fl (s0 ) ∈ Range(V ) and
G 0 (s0 ), . . . , G k (s0 ) ∈ Range(W ), then
H (s) = CK−1 (s)B, (4) H (i) (s0 ) = Ĥ (i) (s0 ) ∀ i = 0, . . . , l + k + 1.
where K(s) = s dj =0 E j e−sτ j − dj =0 A j e−sτ j . Here, (·)(i) denotes the i -th derivative of a function.
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4180 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 69, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2022
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
FENG et al.: MOR FOR DELAYED PEEC MODELS WITH GUARANTEED ACCURACY AND OBSERVED STABILITY 4181
B. Stable Versions of the Algorithms in [15] Inserting X r (s) = K−1 (s)R pr (s) into the last equality in (8),
We find that H-greedy and SSI-greedy in [15] produce we get
ROMs that are unstable in the time domain. This probably H (s) − Ĥ (s) = C(s)X r (s). (10)
is caused by the Petrov-Galerkin projection. In this work,
we propose to replace the Petrov-Galerkin projection in In [17], instead of solving the system (9) of the FOM dimen-
H-greedy and SSI-greedy with Galerkin projection by equating sion, a ROM of (9) is first constructed by computing another
W to V , i.e., W = V , and only compute V during the projection matrix Vr , i.e.,
greedy iterations. Finally, the ROMs are obtained by applying
VrT K(s)Vr Z r (s) = VrT R pr (s). (11)
Galerkin projection to the FOM using V . We name the
Galerkin versions of H-greedy and SSI-greedy as H-greedy-G An approximate solution X̃ r (s) to (9) is obtained by X̃ r (s) =
and SSI-greedy-G, respectively. It will be demonstrated in Vr Z r (s). Replacing X r (s) in (10) with X̃ r (s), we obtain the
Section IV that H-greedy-G and SSI-greedy-G do construct error estimator for Ĥ (s):
ROMs that are stable in the time domain, while the ROMs
obtained from H-greedy and SSI-greedy are not stable. H (s) − Ĥ (s) ≈ C(s) X̃ r (s) =: D(s).
In the next section, we propose a new error estimator leading
In this work, we consider the matrix max-norm of the error,
to a fast-to-compute ∗ (s) in Step 7 of Algorithm 1 reported
i.e.,
in Fig. 1. Moreover, the error estimator directly measures
the magnitude of the reduced transfer function error, i.e., H (s) − Ĥ (s)max ≈ D(s)max = max |Di j (s)| =: (s),
ij
(s). Therefore, it is a more intuitive error measure. It is
demonstrated in Section IV that (s) can be tightly estimated (12)
by the new error estimator. The proposed algorithm based on where Di j (s) is the i, j -th entry of error matrix D(s). Finally,
the new error estimator also uses Galerkin projection to avoid we use the maximum as our error estimator (s) for esti-
instability of the ROMs in the time domain. mating the error of Ĥ (s). On the one hand, it is shown
in [17] that (s) can tightly estimate the error of Ĥ (s) in
C. The New Error Estimator the sense that is is very close to the true error of Ĥ (s).
On the other hand, computing the error estimator (s) is
In the following, we introduce an error estimator for the much faster than computing the true error defined as (s) =
reduced transfer function Ĥ (s) of the ROM for the delayed max |Hi j (s) − Ĥi j (s)|, where the original transfer function
PEEC model in (3). The error estimator is initially proposed ij
in [17] and applied to MNA formulated circuit examples H (s) needs to be computed, which involves computational
without delay. Since the error estimator is applicable to any cost with complexity of the FOM dimension n. Note that
linear system, we consider adapting it to the delayed PEEC computing (s) needs only an approximate solution computed
models in this work. Detailed description of the error estimator from the ROM of the primal-residual system (9). Moreover,
for the delay system in (3) is as follows. Define a primal constructing the ROM (11) of this system can be done in
system in the frequency domain as parallel with constructing the ROM of the original system.
In particular, the projection matrix Vr can be computed in
K(s)X pr (s) = B, (6) parallel with V during the iteration of Algorithm 1 reported
in Fig. 1. Based on the new error estimator (s), we propose
The reduced primal system is defined as a new algorithm reported in Fig. 2, denoted as Algorithm 1,
K̂(s)Z pr (s) = B̂, (7) where the error measure ∗ (s) in Step 7 of Algorithm 1 is
replaced by (s) and computation of (s) for the PEEC
so that X̂ pr (s) := V Z pr (s) well approximates the solution model in (3) is specified.
X pr (s). The primal residual is defined as Remark 1: From the analysis in [17], Vr should be com-
puted in the same way as computing V , but with a different
R pr (s) = B − K(s) X̂ pr (s). interpolation point skr at every iteration. Since otherwise,
if sk = skr , then (s) is identically zero [17]. It is also analyzed
Following the definition of Ĥ (s) and the reduced primal in [17], that sk should be far away from skr to avoid (s)
system (7), we obtain the error between H (s) and Ĥ (s): being close to zero leading to underestimation of the true error.
||H (s) − Ĥ (s)|| In the subsequent iterations, skr , k > 1, is chosen such that
rr (s)2 (rr (s) is defined in Step 8 of Algorithm 2, reported
= C(s)(K−1 (s)B(s) − V K̂−1 (s) B̂(s))
in Fig. 2), is maximized to make sure that skr is different
= C(s)K−1 (s)(B(s) − K(s) V K̂−1 (s) B̂(s)) from sk . As has been mentioned before, we use Galerkin
X̂ pr (s):=V Z pr (s) projection to construct the ROM, i.e., W = V , so that the
−1 cost of constructing W in Steps 4-5 of Algorithm 1, reported
= C(s)K (s)R pr (s), (8) in Fig. 1, is saved in Algorithm2.
Define the primal-residual system as below, Remark 2: Different error estimators for the reduced trans-
fer function are proposed in [17]. Theoretical analyses in [17]
K(s)X r (s) = R pr (s). (9) indicate that (s) has the least computational complexity,
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4182 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 69, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2022
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
FENG et al.: MOR FOR DELAYED PEEC MODELS WITH GUARANTEED ACCURACY AND OBSERVED STABILITY 4183
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4184 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 69, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2022
TABLE I
C OPLANAR M ICROSTRIP : n = 16, 644, 168 D ELAYS
TABLE II
M ICROSTRIP F ILTER : n = 12, 132, 190 D ELAYS
Fig. 6. Coplanar microstrips: error decay in the greedy iterations, true error
vs error estimator.
TABLE III
M ICROSTRIP P OWER -D IVIDER : n = 10, 626, 93 D ELAYS
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
FENG et al.: MOR FOR DELAYED PEEC MODELS WITH GUARANTEED ACCURACY AND OBSERVED STABILITY 4185
Fig. 8. Microstrip power-divider: error decay in the greedy iterations, true Fig. 10. Coplanar microstrips: magnitude errors of the reduced transfer
error vs error estimator. function from input port 1 to output port 1 computed by different algorithms.
Fig. 9. Coplanar microstrips: magnitude of the transfer function from input Fig. 11. Coplanar microstrips: phase of the transfer function from input
port 1 to output port 1 computed by Algorithm 2 and FOM simulation. port 1 to output port 1 computed by Algorithm 2 and FOM simulation.
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4186 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 69, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2022
Fig. 13. Coplanar microstrips: magnitude of the transfer function from input Fig. 16. Coplanar microstrips: angle error of the reduced transfer function
port 1 to output port 6 computed by Algorithm 2 and FOM simulation. from input port 1 to output port 6 computed by different algorithms.
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
FENG et al.: MOR FOR DELAYED PEEC MODELS WITH GUARANTEED ACCURACY AND OBSERVED STABILITY 4187
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4188 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 69, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2022
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
FENG et al.: MOR FOR DELAYED PEEC MODELS WITH GUARANTEED ACCURACY AND OBSERVED STABILITY 4189
the frequency domain and the time domain for three large-scale
PEEC models with up to 191 delays support our analysis and
demonstrate the robustness of the proposed algorithm.
A PPENDIX
This appendix summarizes the modified Gram-Schmidt
process, reported in Fig. 27, applied in this work.
R EFERENCES
[1] J. Cullum, A. Ruehli, and T. Zhang, “A method for reduced-order
modeling and simulation of large interconnect circuits and its application
to PEEC models with retardation,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II, Analog
Digit. Signal Process., vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 261–273, Apr. 2000.
[2] P. Benner, S. Gugercin, and K. Willcox, “A survey of projection-based
model reduction methods for parametric dynamical systems,” SIAM Rev.,
vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 483–531, 2015.
[3] A. C. Antoulas, C. A. Beattie, and S. Gugercin, Interpolatory Meth-
ods for Model Reduction (Computational Science & Engineering).
Philadelphia, PA, USA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics,
2020.
[4] P. Benner, S. Grivet-Talocia, A. Quarteroni, G. Rozza,
Fig. 27. Modified gram-schmidt process for orthogonalizing the columns of W. H. A. Schilders, and L. M. Silveira, Model Order Reduction:
V1 with the columns in an orthogonal matrix V . System- and Data-Driven Methods and Algorithms, vol. 1. Berlin,
Germany: De Gruyter, 2021.
[5] E. R. Samuel, L. Knockaert, and T. Dhaene, “Model order reduction of
cases, H-greedy behaves worse than others both in the fre- time-delay systems using a Laguerre expansion technique,” IEEE Trans.
quency and in the time domain, though it uses much less Circuits Syst. I, Reg. Papers, vol. 61, no. 6, pp. 1815–1823, Jun. 2014.
offline time (T-off) than SSI-greedy. SSI-greedy-G has slight [6] E. R. Samuel, D. Deschrijver, F. Ferranti, L. Knockaert, and T. Dhaene,
“Multipoint model order reduction for systems with delays,” in IEEE
oscillations in the time domain for the coplanar microstrips MTT-S Int. Microw. Symp. Dig., Aug. 2015, pp. 1–3.
model. Finally, considering runtime, accuracy and stability, the [7] E. R. Samuel, L. Knockaert, and T. Dhaene, “Matrix-interpolation-based
proposed Algorithm 2 is most efficient. The results in the time parametric model order reduction for multiconductor transmission lines
with delays,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. II, Exp. Briefs, vol. 62, no. 3,
domain show that Galerkin projection produces ROMs that are pp. 276–280, Mar. 2015.
more stable, since all ROMs derived using Galerkin projection [8] A. E. Ruehli, G. Antonini, and L. Jiang, Circuit Oriented Electromag-
are stable, and only a single Petrov-Galerkin ROM derived by netic Modeling Using the PEEC Techniques. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley,
2017.
H-greedy for the microstrip filter model is stable. A method, [9] W. Tseng, C. Chen, E. Gad, M. Nakhla, and R. Achar, “Passive order
based on linear matrix inequalities, to study the input-to state reduction for RLC circuits with delay elements,” IEEE Trans. Adv.
stability of PEEC models with multiple non-commensurate Packag., vol. 30, no. 4, pp. 830–840, Nov. 2007.
[10] F. Ferranti, M. S. Nakhla, G. Antonini, T. Dhaene, L. Knockaert, and
time delays has been presented in [31] but it becomes ineffi- A. E. Ruehli, “Multipoint full-wave model order reduction for delayed
cient when a large number of delays is considered. To the best PEEC models with large delays,” IEEE Trans. Electromagn. Compat.,
knowledge of the authors, theoretical analysis on the stability vol. 53, no. 4, pp. 959–967, Nov. 2011.
[11] A. Odabasioglu, M. Celik, and L. T. Pileggi, “PRIMA: Passive reduced-
of the ROMs for time-delayed PEEC models with a large order interconnect macromodeling algorithm,” IEEE Trans. Comput.-
number of delays rarely appear in the literature. It should be Aided Design Integr. Circuits Syst., vol. 17, no. 8, pp. 645–654,
an interesting topic for future research. Aug. 1998.
[12] Y. Dou and K.-L. Wu, “A passive PEEC-based micromodeling circuit
for high-speed interconnection problems,” IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory
V. C ONCLUSION Techn., vol. 66, no. 3, pp. 1201–1214, Mar. 2018.
[13] Y. Dou and K.-L. Wu, “Direct mesh-based model order reduction of
A robust model order reduction algorithm for time-delayed PEEC model for quasi-static circuit problems,” IEEE Trans. Microw.
PEEC models is proposed in this work. A tight error estimator Theory Techn., vol. 64, no. 8, pp. 2409–2422, Aug. 2016.
[14] L. Lombardi, Y. Tao, B. Nouri, F. Ferranti, G. Antonini, and M. S.
is the key factor that make the algorithm successful both in the Nakhla, “Parameterized model order reduction of delayed PEEC cir-
frequency domain and in the time domain. Computing the error cuits,” IEEE Trans. Electromagn. Compat., vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 859–869,
estimator involves computing two residuals that are introduced Jun. 2020.
[15] D. Alfke, L. Feng, L. Lombardi, G. Antonini, and P. Benner, “Model
by the ROM of the FOM and another ROM of a residual order reduction for delay systems by iterative interpolation,” Int.
system. Constructing the ROM of the residual system can be J. Numer. Methods Eng., vol. 122, no. 3, pp. 684–706, Feb. 2021.
simultaneously implemented with the targeted ROM construc- [16] C. Beattie and S. Gugercin, “Interpolatory projection methods for
structure-preserving model reduction,” Syst. Control Lett., vol. 58, no. 3,
tion within one greedy algorithm. The error estimator is much pp. 225–232, Mar. 2009.
cheaper than the previously proposed error estimator making [17] L. Feng and P. Benner, “On error estimation for reduced-order modeling
the greedy algorithm much more efficient than the existing of linear non-parametric and parametric systems,” ESAIM, Math. Model.
Numer. Anal., vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 561–594, Mar. 2021.
greedy algorithms. Compared with the existing methods for [18] L. Feng, L. Lombardi, G. Antonini, and P. Benner, “Stable macromodels
time-delay systems, which interpolate an approximation of for delayed PEEC models with error estimation,” in Proc. Int. Appl.
the original transfer function, the resulting proposed algorithm Comput. Electromagn. Soc. (ACES) Symp., Aug. 2021, pp. 1–4.
[19] A. E. Ruehli, “Inductance calculations in a complex integrated circuit
interpolates the original transfer functions directly, leading to environment,” IBM J. Res. Develop., vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 470–481,
more accurate results in the frequency domain. Results in both Sep. 1972.
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
4190 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON CIRCUITS AND SYSTEMS—I: REGULAR PAPERS, VOL. 69, NO. 10, OCTOBER 2022
[20] A. E. Ruehli and P. A. Brennan, “Efficient capacitance calculations Peter Benner received the Diploma degree
for three-dimensional multiconductor systems,” IEEE Trans. Microw. in mathematics from the RWTH Aachen
Theory Techn., vol. MTT-21, no. 2, pp. 76–82, Feb. 1973. University, Aachen, Germany, in 1993, the
[21] A. E. Ruehli, “Equivalent circuit models for three-dimensional multi- Ph.D. degree in mathematics from the University
conductor systems,” IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Techn., vol. MTT-22, of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA, and the TU
no. 3, pp. 216–221, Mar. 1974. Chemnitz-Zwickau, Germany, in February 1997,
[22] C. Gianfagna, L. Lombardi, and G. Antonini, “Marching-on-in-time and the Habilitation (Venia Legendi) degree in
solution of delayed PEEC models of conductive and dielectric objects,” mathematics from the University of Bremen,
IET Microw., Antennas Propag., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 42–47, Jan. 2019. Germany, in 2001. After spending a term as
[23] M. Taskinen and P. Ylä-Oijala, “Current and charge integral equation a Visiting Associate Professor with the TU
formulation,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 58–67, Hamburg-Hamburg, Germany, he was a Lecturer in
Jan. 2006. Mathematics with the TU Berlin, Germany, from 2001 to 2003. Since 2003,
[24] D. Gope, A. Ruehli, and V. Jandhyala, “Solving low-frequency EM-CKT he has been a Professor of mathematics in industry and technology with
problems using the PEEC method,” IEEE Trans. Adv. Packag., vol. 30, the TU Chemnitz. In 2010, he was appointed as one of the four Directors
no. 2, pp. 313–320, May 2007. of the Max Planck Institute for Dynamics of Complex Technical Systems,
[25] A. Bellen, N. Guglielmi, and A. E. Ruehli, “Methods for linear systems Magdeburg, Germany. Since 2011, he has been an Honorary Professor with
of circuit delay differential equations of neutral type,” IEEE Trans. the Otto-von-Guericke University of Magdeburg, Germany. His research
Circuits Syst. I, Fundam. Theory Appl., vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 212–215, interests include scientific computing, numerical mathematics, systems
Jan. 1999. theory, and optimal control. He is a SIAM Fellow (Class of 2017).
[26] A. Ruehli, U. Miekkala, A. Bellen, and H. Heeb, “Stable time domain
solutions for EMC problems using PEEC circuit models,” in Proc. IEEE
Symp. Electromagn. Compat., Aug. 1994, pp. 371–376.
[27] W. Pinello, A. C. Cangellaris, and A. Ruehli, “Hybrid electromagnetic
modeling of noise interactions in packaged electronics based on the
partial-element equivalent-circuit formulation,” IEEE Trans. Microw.
Theory Techn., vol. 45, no. 10, pp. 1889–1896, Oct. 1997.
[28] R. F. Harrington, Field Computation by Moment Methods. Malabar,
India: Krieger, 1982.
[29] S. Chellappa, L. Feng, V. de la Rubia, and P. Benner, “Adaptive interpo-
latory MOR by learning the error estimator in the parameter domain,” in
Model Reduction of Complex Dynamical Systems (International Series of
Numerical Mathematics), vol. 171, P. Benner, T. Breiten, H. Faßbender,
M. Hinze, T. Stykel, and R. Zimmermann, Eds. Cham, Switzerland:
Birkhäuser, 2021, pp. 97–117.
[30] L. Lombardi et al., “Time-domain analysis of retarded partial element
equivalent circuit models using numerical inversion of Laplace trans-
form,” IEEE Trans. Electromagn. Compat., vol. 63, no. 3, pp. 870–879, Daniele Romano was born in Campobasso, Italy,
Jun. 2021. in 1984. He received the Laurea degree in computer
[31] G. Antonini and P. Pepe, “Input-to-state stability analysis of partial- science and automation engineering from the Uni-
element equivalent-circuit models,” IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I, Reg. versity of L’Aquila, L’Aquila, Italy, in 2012, and the
Papers, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 673–684, Mar. 2009. Ph.D. degree in 2018. Since 2012, he has been with
the UAq EMC Laboratory, University of L’Aquila,
focusing on EMC modeling and analysis, algorithm
engineering, and speed-up techniques applied to
EMC problems.
Authorized licensed use limited to: HANGZHOU DIANZI UNIVERSITY. Downloaded on April 23,2023 at 06:19:21 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.