Systematic Approach to Estimating Monocycle Pulse for Time-Domain Studies of UWB Antennas Using Numerical Computations and Simulation Tools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article describes a new technique for determining an appropriate input pulse and its duration, which are important for time-domain studies of ultra-wideband (UWB) antennas. For such studies, the researchers normally prefer EM simulation tools, and use different types of input pulses. The basis of the choice of input pulse is a bit obscure in most of the reports appearing in the open literature. Antenna researchers indeed face a problem in having suitable guidelines for choosing the input pulse, a mathematical approach to generate it, and in estimating the pulse's duration. The width or duration of the input pulse cannot be arbitrary. This plays a significant role in determining the reliable time-domain response of the antenna in both transmitting and receiving modes. This is successfully addressed in this paper, taking a UWB monopole as the antenna under test. The proposed technique should accurately guide and help a researcher to perform the time-domain characterization of a UWB monopole/dipole antenna using mathematical tools and EM simulators commercially available.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".