MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analysis of the periodic superconducting CPW transmission line with stepped-impedance for on-chip microwave filter applications

2010· article· en· W2058030948 on OpenAlexaff
Hamid Reza Mohebbi, A. Hamed Majedi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physics Conference Series · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCharacteristic impedanceCoplanar waveguideQuarter-wave impedance transformerElectrical impedanceTransmission lineAttenuationImpedance matchingFilter (signal processing)Scattering parametersPassbandCenter frequencyOpticsAcousticsPhysicsElectronic engineeringMaterials scienceMicrowaveBand-pass filterDamping factorComputer scienceTelecommunicationsEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the filter properties of a superconducting coplanar waveguide (CPW) periodically loaded with stepped-impedances. The unit cell of the steppedimpedance filter is a cascade of two transmission lines (TLs) with different characteristic impedances. This impedance difference is obtained by step changing on the width of the center strip of the CPW. We use the ABCD matrix representation together with the Floquet analysis to derive the dispersion relation of the infinitely long periodic structure. Scattering matrix analysis along with impedance calculation is performed for an arbitrary number of unit cells. Complex propagation constant, scattering parameters and the input impedance of the structure are expressed in a closed-form equations. The results display the low-pass filtering property. Also, the effect of changing geometrical parameters on the cut off frequency, rejection bandwidth and attenuation in rejection band of such a filter are shown and discussed in this paper.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.468
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physics Conference SeriesSame topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207