MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087767319 · doi:10.1109/map.2008.4563628

Wave Propagation in 1D EBGs: Periodic Multilayer Films Consisting of Two Different Materials [This Issue's Contribution]

2008· article· en· W2087767319 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Foroozesh, L. Shafai

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Antenna and Metasurface Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHFSSTransmission lineImpedance matchingElectromagneticsElectronic engineeringMetamaterialWave propagationAcousticsElectrical impedanceComputer scienceEngineeringElectrical engineeringOpticsPhysicsAntenna (radio)Microstrip antenna

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the fundamental concept of wave propagation in periodic multilayer films consisting of two different materials, so-called one-dimensional electromagnetic bandgap (EBG) materials. To this end, Floquet's theorem is first presented. Next, the transmission-line analogy is used to simplify the concept of wave propagation in one dimension. The Bloch impedance concept is then presented, and its usefulness is illustrated in the applications of truncated periodic structures. Through a few case studies, it is shown that the ripples usually appearing in the pass band of the EBGs are due to the mismatch of the transmission-line ports. When the EBG structures are terminated to appropriate Bloch impedances, the ripples disappear. The material can be used in undergraduate or graduate "Microwave Engineering" or "Advanced Engineering Electromagnetics" courses. The students need to know about the ABCD matrix in advance. The material helps students in better understanding of microwave filters, and shows the importance of matching the terminal ports and number of unit cells. Students can use software packages such as MATLAB to obtain the Bloch impedances, and such as Ansoft HFSS to reproduce the scattering parameters presented in this paper. The materials in this paper are consistent with those in [3, 7, 8, 9] and, in some cases, are summarized from these references to improve the clarity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Antennas and Propagation MagazineSame topicAdvanced Antenna and Metasurface TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207