Carbon-fiber composite T-match folded bow-tie antenna for RFID applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, the authors investigate the use of carbon-fiber composite material for the radiating element for an radiofrequency identification antenna, the T-match folded bow-tie antenna. We consider two kinds of composites that have relatively high electrical conductivity for the radiating element: (1) a braided tissue of carbon fibers embedded in epoxy resin, and (2) reinforced long carbon-fibers in an epoxy matrix. All simulations are performed using CST MWS software. Since braided-tissue of carbon-fiber composite shows isotropic behavior, the composite antenna has almost the same resonant frequency of 950 MHz as the metal antenna. However, the radiation efficiency degrades due to the low conductivity of composites compared to metals. By using anisotropic reinforced carbon-fiber composite as a material for the radiating element, the behavior of the antenna changes and the resonant frequency increases to 2.45 GHz. The anisotropic conductivity allows the antenna designer to largely restrict current flow to one direction, and this may lead to novel antenna designs.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".