Tall microstrip transmission lines for dielectric resonator antenna applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dielectric resonator antennas (DRAs) excited by tall microstrip transmission lines (TMLs) are investigated. Two different TML–DRA structures are proposed and the impact of TML parameters on the antenna performance is studied when low‐loss and lossy substrates are used. To validate the effectiveness of this approach, a set of prototype antennas was fabricated, measured and compared with simulation results. A good agreement is obtained. It is found that by adjusting TML parameters, excellent impedance matching and coupling to low‐permittivity DRAs are achieved even on high‐permittivity substrates. The impedance bandwidth of a single‐mode simple‐shape rectangular DRA with ɛ rd = 9 can be as high as 25%. The radiation efficiency of the antenna on extremely lossy substrates is significantly improved and based on the measured results over 80% efficiency with a gain ranging from 4.2 to 5.5 dBi along the impedance bandwidth can be expected. Since TML is a low‐loss transmission line, the DRA is a low‐loss radiator and low‐permittivity DRAs can be well matched by TML, the TML–DRA forms an excellent wideband antenna system with high radiation efficiency.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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".