Light scattering by a cube: Accuracy limits of the discrete dipole approximation and the T-matrix method

• Published in: Journal of quantitative spectroscopy & radiative transfer Vol. 123; pp. 176 - 183
• Main Authors: Yurkin, Maxim A., Kahnert, Michael
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 01.07.2013
• Subjects: Benchmark results; boundary-condition method; computations; convergence; Cube; Discrete dipole approximation; electromagnetic scattering; equations; formulation; Light scattering simulation; optical-properties; shaped particles; T-matrix; Light scattering simulation; T-matrix; Discrete dipole approximation; Benchmark results; Cube
• ISSN: 0022-4073; 1879-1352
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jqsrt.2012.10.001

We simulated light-scattering by small and wavelength-sized cubes with three largely different values of the refractive index using the discrete dipole approximation (DDA) and the T-matrix method. Our main goal was to push the accuracy of both methods to the limit. For the DDA we used an earlier developed extrapolation technique based on simulation results for different levels of discretization. For the T-matrix method we developed a procedure to estimate a confidence range for the simulated value, using results for different values of the truncation index (number of multipoles). In most cases this confidence range was reliable, enclosing the corresponding DDA result. We present benchmark results by both methods, including estimated uncertainties, for selected integral and angle-resolved scattering quantities. Estimated relative uncertainties of the DDA result are unprecedentedly small (from 10−7 to 10−3), while relative differences between the T-matrix and DDA results are larger (from 10−4 to 0.2) in accordance with estimated T-matrix uncertainties. ► We simulate light-scattering by cubes using the DDA and T-matrix method. ► We study the convergence of the T-matrix result versus number of multipoles. ► We develop a procedure to estimate a confidence range for the T-matrix result. ► Benchmark results with relative uncertainties down to 10−7 are provided.