Analysis and design of dual band-notched interdigital hairpin UWB bandpass filter
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, a new dual band-notched UWB (Ultra Wideband) bandpass filter which is proposed to control harmonic components of 2.14 GHz is designed and tested. Interdigital hairpin structure is applied in the dual band-notched UWB bandpass filter design. By adding only one pair of folded fingers on both side extremities of single band notched UWB bandpass filter, the fabricated filter can suppress the second and third harmonics of fundamental frequency. The dual notched bands can be easily controlled by changing the parameters of each finger. Without changing the first notched frequency band, the second reject frequency band can be shifted by changing its corresponding parameter of finger independently. In this paper, one dual band-notched UWB bandpass filter are designed to control the second and third harmonics of 2.14 GHz. The measured result of the final fabricated circuit shows that insertion loss at 4.28 GHz and 6.42 GHz are 13.99 dB and 4.16 dB, respectively. Because of the folded finger structure, the filter is compact in size. The dimension of our proposed filter is 5.5 mm × 21.3 mm.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".