MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2120372503 · doi:10.1002/mop.25140

Planar ultrawideband antenna array for short‐range wireless communications

2010· article· en· W2120372503 on OpenAlexaff
Osama M. Haraz, Abdel‐Razik Sebak

Bibliographic record

VenueMicrowave and Optical Technology Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDipole antennaRadiation patternAntenna arrayPlanarAntenna measurementCollinear antenna arrayEngineeringMonopole antennaAntenna (radio)Bandwidth (computing)Electrical engineeringGround planeElectronic engineeringAcousticsPhysicsAntenna efficiencyTelecommunicationsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this article, novel 2‐element and 4‐element planar ultrawideband (UWB) antenna arrays with bidirectional radiation patterns based on identical UWB antenna elements for UWB communications applications have been proposed, simulated and experimentally investigated. Each array is constructed by means of feeding omni‐directional printed UWB monopole antennas with a UWB power divider. The proposed 2‐element antenna array yields an impedance bandwidth of 110% (3.1–10.6 GHz) covering the whole UWB frequency bandwidth while the impedance bandwidth is multi‐band in case of the 4‐element antenna array because of the increasing effect of mutual coupling among antenna elements. The calculated gain of the 2‐element and 4‐element array is quite stable with about 3 and 6 dB higher than that of the single element, respectively. Both measured and calculated E‐plane radiation patterns of the array and the single element are almost the same while the H‐plane radiation patterns of the array are distinctively bidirectional compared to the omni‐directional pattern of the single element. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microwave Opt Technol Lett 52: 1061–1066, 2010; Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/mop.25140

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations8
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicrowave and Optical Technology LettersSame topicAntenna Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207