MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The use of Random Auxiliary Sources for reflectarray feed analysis

2015· article· en· W1930067379 on OpenAlexaff
M. A. Moharram, Ahmed A. Kishk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Antenna and Metasurface Technologies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflection (computer programming)Antenna (radio)Aperture (computer memory)Process (computing)Radiation patternComputer scienceIterative and incremental developmentScatteringRadiationIterative methodOpticsElectronic engineeringAlgorithmPhysicsAcousticsTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate modeling for reflectarray antenna feeds is performed via using equivalent Random Auxiliary Sources (RAS) problems for both radiating and scattering modes. The developed models are proposed to accurately predict aperture efficiency components for reflectarray analysis. They are also used in an iterative process using the multiple reflection algorithm (P. Kildal et al, IEEE Trans. on Antennas and Propagations, 45, 7, 1130–1139, 1997) to accurately predict the gain and radiation pattern of the reflectarray antenna in the presence of the feed.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.167

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.087
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Antenna and Metasurface TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207