MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141627340 · doi:10.2528/pierb12022906

PERMITTIVITY MEASUREMENTS OF BIOLOGICAL SAMPLES BY AN OPEN-ENDED COAXIAL LINE

2012· article· en· W2141627340 on OpenAlexaff
J. S. Bobowski, Thomas Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress In Electromagnetics Research B · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave and Dielectric Measurement Techniques
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermittivityConductivityTransmission lineMaterials scienceCoaxialElectrical impedanceElectrical resistivity and conductivityRelative permittivityReliability (semiconductor)Polarization (electrochemistry)Electronic engineeringOptoelectronicsElectrical engineeringDielectricPhysicsChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We previously reported on the complex permittivity and dc conductivity of waste-activated sludge. The measurements, spanning a frequency range of 3 MHz to 40 GHz, were made using an open-ended coaxial transmission line. Although this technique is well established in the literature, we found that it was necessary to combine methods from several papers to use the open-ended coaxial probe to reliably characterize biological samples having a high dc conductivity. Here, we provide a set of detailed and practical guidelines that can be used to determine the permittivity and conductivity of biological samples over a broad frequency range. Due to the electrode polarization effect, low frequency measurements of conducting samples require corrections to extract the intrinsic electrical properties. We describe one practical correction scheme and verify its reliability using a control sample.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.242
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.164 · 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
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

Citations92
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgress In Electromagnetics Research BSame topicMicrowave and Dielectric Measurement TechniquesFrench-language works237,207