A study of the symmetry of field patterns of elliptic horns fed by elliptic waveguides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Horn antennas are widely used as feeding systems in a variety of antennas in space communications and astronomy. While an elliptic horn fed by an elliptic waveguide is also known to exhibit symmetric field patterns, its theoretical treatment was always perceived as too time-consuming. With the availability of faster and larger digital computers, however, the computation of Mathieu functions, in terms of which the eigenmodes of elliptic waveguides can be expressed, is a practical undertaking. When the elliptic horn is operated in the frequency range, where only its dominant mode, TE(/sub c/11), is propagating, only a single set of expansion coefficients are in fact needed, as both Mathieu (ce/sub 1/) and modified Mathieu (Ce/sub 1/) functions share the same set of expansion coefficients. These expansion coefficients can be calculated once at the beginning of the computations, they are, read from the computer memory every time values of the Mathieu functions are needed. Taking advantage of this property considerably speeds up the calculations. The analysis presented follows the modified analysis of conical horns presented by Bornemann (see Microwave Opt. Technol. Lett., vol.10, p.91-94, Oct. 1995). The authors also show how the phase difference is computed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".