• Proceedings of the Optical Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 1998.08a
• /
• pp.119-120
• /
• 1998

• Proceedings of the Optical Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 2007.07a
• /
• pp.5-6
• /
• 2007

• Proceedings of the Optical Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 2001.08a
• /
• pp.220-221
• /
• 2001

• Proceedings of the Optical Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 1996.09a
• /
• pp.33-33
• /
• 1996

• Optical Science and Technology
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.35-36
• /
• 1998

• Proceedings of the Optical Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 1997.08a
• /
• pp.72-72
• /
• 1997

• Proceedings of the Optical Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 2002.11a
• /
• pp.266-268
• /
• 2002

• Proceedings of the Optical Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 2002.11a
• /
• pp.4-5
• /
• 2002

• The Journal of Korean Institute of Electromagnetic Engineering and Science
• /
• v.26 no.11
• /
• pp.1012-1019
• /
• 2015

This paper shows the acceleration of iterative physical optics(IPO) for radar cross section(RCS) by using two techniques effectively. For the analysis of the multiple reflection in the cavity, IPO uses the near field method, unlike shooting and bouncing rays method which uses the geometric optics(GO). However, it is still far slower than physical optics(PO) and it is needed to accelerate the speed of IPO for practical purpose. In order to address this problem, graphic processing unit(GPU) can be applied to reduce calculation time and adaptive iterative physical optics-change rate(AIPO-CR) method is also applicable effectively to optimize iteration for acceleration of calculation.

• Journal of Korean Ophthalmic Optics Society
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.413-428
• /
• 2013

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate students and optometrist opinion of the usefulness of different subjects of optometry curriculum.This date will then be used as base-line data during a process of curriculum development Methods: 292 of ophthalmic optic's students and 123 of optometrists were surveyed in the usefulness of curriculum (five-point scale) followed by statistical analysis of the results. Results: Optometrists gave a higher average score for curriculum usefulness (3.89) than the students (3.71). The subject which showed the highest usefulness for the student was optometry (4.55) but clinical practice was the highest for the optometrist (4.48). There was significant differences (p<.05) on optics, ophthalmology, basic science, optometrist related subject and foreign language but optometry and contact lenses showed high usefulness in common without significant difference. The usefulness of subject for the student showed significant difference according to gender, grade, age, and desired working place and has demonstrated significant difference depend on gender, age, scholarship, total working experience as an optometrist, workplace, and position for optometrists as well. Conclusions: It is necessary to continue research for the development of standard and bench-marked curriculum for ophthalmic optics and also the curriculum, which reflecting the usefulness and needs obtained from ophthalmic optics' students and optometrists need to be developed.