MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126085217 · doi:10.1109/tap.2010.2050443

Low Cost Planar Waveguide Technology-Based Dielectric Resonator Antenna (DRA) for Millimeter-Wave Applications: Analysis, Design, and Fabrication

2010· article· en· W2126085217 on OpenAlexaff
Wael M. Abdel Wahab, Dan Busuioc, Safieddin Safavi‐Naeini

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHFSSDielectric resonator antennaAntenna efficiencyOpticsAntenna (radio)Slot antennaExtremely high frequencyRadiation patternMaterials scienceWaveguideAntenna gainPlanarOptoelectronicsResonatorPhysicsMicrostrip antennaTelecommunicationsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A compact, low cost and high radiation efficiency antenna structure, planar waveguide, substrate integrated waveguide (SIW), dielectric resonator antennas (DRA) is presented in this paper. Since SIW is a high Q- waveguide and DRA is a low loss radiator, then SIW-DRA forms an excellent antenna system with high radiation efficiency at millimeter-waveband, where the conductor loss dominates. The impact of different antenna parameters on the antenna performance is studied. Experimental data for SIW-DRA, based on two different slot orientations, at millimeter-wave band are introduced and compared to the simulated HFSS results to validate our proposed antenna model. A good agreement is obtained. The measured gain for SIW-DRA single element showed a broadside gain of 5.51 dB,-19 dB maximum cross polarized radiation level, and overall calculated (simulated using HFSS) radiation efficiency of greater than 95%.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations96
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and PropagationSame topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207