Performance Evaluation of Conductive-Paper Dipole Antennas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The feasibility of electrically conductive paper as a low-cost and eco-friendly alternative to copper is presented for application as an antenna conductor in UHF radio-frequency identification (RFID) systems. The conductivity of the paper is determined to be 50 S/m and the effect of such a low conductivity on the radiation performance of a half-wavelength dipole is investigated through simulation and experimental measurements. The radiation efficiency of a dipole cut from a 0.4 mm thick conductive paper sheet is measured to be 5.0%, which translates to an RFID tag read range of 22% of that obtained using copper. This performance is deemed unacceptable for most antenna applications. However, through simulation a conductivity of 500 S/m is identified as a reasonable target for the developers of conductive paper as the current distribution and terminal properties of the resulting antenna become similar to those observed when using copper. The radiation efficiency is projected at 56 % in this case, resulting in an RFID read range of 73% of that obtained using copper.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".