Efficiency and gain of slot antennas and arrays on thick dielectric substrates for millimeter-wave applications: a unified approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A unified approach for representing the surface-wave fields and for computing the corresponding radiation efficiencies from arbitrarily shaped slot-type antennas on thick dielectric substrates at millimeter-wave (mm-wave) frequencies is presented. In this approach, two different representations of the surface-wave fields, i.e., the one based on the idea that the surface-wave power can be associated with a substrate radiation pattern and the other based on the cylindrical wave expansion, are linked together in a unified way. The developed theory is then applied for investigating the surface wave characteristics of printed twin offset slots and uniform linear slot arrays. Based on the developed theory, new insight into the mechanism with which surface-wave power is coupled by the slot pair is presented. Subsequently, the optimum number of elements and corresponding interelement spacing for linear, uniformly excited, slot dipole arrays is explored for achieving maximum radiation efficiency and gain. In order to provide guidance on practical mm-wave integrated slot antenna array design, supportive numerical results are presented for Substrates of dielectric constant /spl epsi//sub r/ = 4.0 and /spl epsi//sub r/ = 12.0.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".