MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113309249 · doi:10.1109/tap.2011.2109694

Lenses for Circular Polarization Using Planar Arrays of Rotated Passive Elements

2011· article· en· W2113309249 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Antenna and Metasurface Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsOpticsLens (geology)PhysicsCircular polarizationPolarization (electrochemistry)PlanarAperture (computer memory)Planar arrayCylindrical lensMicrostripFocal lengthAcousticsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A planar array of passive lens elements can be phased to approximate the effect of a curved dielectric lens. The rotational orientation of each element can provide the required phase shift for circular polarization. The array elements must be designed so that the hand of circular polarization changes as the electromagnetic wave passes through the lens. An element is presented that is based on an aperture-coupled microstrip patch antenna, and two lenses are designed. Each lens has a diameter of 254 mm and contains 349 elements. The elements have identical dimensions but the rotational orientation of each element is selected to provide a specific lens function. The first lens is designed to collimate radiation from a feed horn into a beam pointing 20 <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">°</sup> from broadside. At 12.9 GHz the aperture efficiency is 48%. The second lens acts as a Wollaston-type prism. It splits an incident wave according to its circular polarization components.

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.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.200 · 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