MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033730257 · doi:10.1109/tap.2013.2295598

A Corrugated Printed Dipole Antenna With Equal Beamwidths

2014· article· en· W2033730257 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad Qudrat‐E‐Maula, L. Shafai, Z. Allahgholi Pour

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOpticsRadiation patternDipole antennaPhysicsReflector (photography)DipoleRadiationAntenna measurementAntenna efficiencyAntenna (radio)Computer scienceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A corrugated printed dipole antenna with equal beamwidths in the principal planes is proposed, designed, and evaluated. Orthogonal stubs are added to the dipole arms to equalize its radiation patterns. They also reduce the size of the dipole arms. The antenna is designed to operate at 3 GHz, and has dimension of 36 × 80 × 1.58 mm <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">3</sup> . The -10 dB S 11 bandwidth of the antenna is from 2.75 to 3.62 GHz, i.e., 27.3%. The E- and H-plane radiation patterns of the antenna are nearly equal up to 135 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">°</sup> from the boresight. To confirm the simulation results, the antenna is fabricated and tested, showing good agreement between simulation and measurement results. Its performance as a feed on a deep reflector, with f/D = 0.25 and D = 45 cm is also studied, where f is the focal length of the reflector and D is its diameter. It provides an enhanced bandwidth of 29.6%, equal E- and H-plane radiation patterns of the reflector, and a gain of 21.4 dBi or an efficiency of 69%. The reflector is only 4.5 λ0 in diameter and would suffer significant blockage losses with conventional waveguide feeds. The proposed feed causes negligible blockage, and provides a respectable efficiency. It is a suitable feed for small symmetric reflectors.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.642

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and PropagationSame topicAntenna Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207