MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158376187 · doi:10.1109/aps.2011.5996701

A view of the input reflection coefficient of the N-port network model for MIMO antennas

2011· article· en· W2158376187 on OpenAlexaff
Jane X. Yun, Rodney G. Vaughan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflection coefficientMIMOReflection (computer programming)Electrical impedanceInput impedancePort (circuit theory)Context (archaeology)Signal-flow graphComputer scienceAntenna (radio)Scattering parametersCoefficient matrixElectronic engineeringTopology (electrical circuits)OpticsPhysicsTelecommunicationsEngineeringElectrical engineeringChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The analysis of MIMO and other multiport antennas requires measurement of their efficiency, as well as other parameters. The total efficiency, as seen by each port, includes the impedance mismatch, i.e., input reflection coefficient, and this must be considered in a multiport context. The input reflection coefficient of a loaded N-port network can be derived with Mason's rule and a signal flow graph. However, when N is larger than 3, this method becomes complicated. The approach presented in this paper is a matrix method which gives an insightful general expression for the input reflection coefficient for any N. The result is consistent with known results and the Mason's rule. The makeup of the resulting formulation shows how the input reflection coefficient is impacted by the various scattering parameters of the multiport antenna and the load reflection coefficients at the other ports.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAntenna Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207