MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2137397307 · doi:10.1109/aps.2012.6348551

Monopole lozange antenna for 60-GHz applications

2012· article· en· W2137397307 on OpenAlexaff
Julien Hautcoeur, Larbi Talbi, Khelifa Hettak

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsCommunications Research Centre CanadaUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonopole antennaDipole antennaReturn lossPhysicsPlanarAntenna (radio)Coaxial antennaAntenna measurementOpticsAcousticsElectrical engineeringComputer scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a planar 60 GHz CPW-fed monopole lozange antenna for switched-beam antenna array application is presented and investigated. The proposed radiating element is a 1.1 mm × 1.1 mm square fed by a CPW feed line. This structure can be an advantage for low coupling and cross-polarization levels in antenna arrays. The simulation results show a return loss less than -10 dB on the whole ISM 60 GHz. In addition, gain is stable.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.987
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAntenna Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207