MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1727284570 · doi:10.1109/aero.2001.931270

Modeling and application of 2D photonic band gap structures

2002· article· en· W1727284570 on OpenAlexaff
Md. Mahbubur Rahman, M.A. Stuchly

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFinite-difference time-domain methodPhotonic crystalTransmission lineEquivalent circuitElectronic circuitPlanarBroadbandOpticsElectrical impedanceFrequency bandMicrowavePhotonicsElectronic engineeringComputer sciencePhysicsAntenna (radio)TelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Photonic band gap (PBG) structures have originally been explored in electro-optics. During the last five years, 2D planar PBG circuits have also been used at microwave frequencies. PBG structures behave as high impedance surfaces and suppress surface waves in one or more frequency ranges. Until now, these circuits have only been reliably modeled by numerical methods. A new equivalent circuit model is proposed. The model is based on the transmission line theory and periodic structures. The model is simple, but limited as it only allows for determination of the stop bands for the two principal directions of wave propagation. Nevertheless, it is a useful first step in the design of PBG structures. If this model is coupled with a simple numerical modeling using the FDTD method, it predicts the complete characteristics of the structure. The proposed analytical and numerical modeling is applied to improve the performance of a broadband circularly polarized patch antenna.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.185 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207