MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2159251629 · doi:10.1109/lawp.2008.2007813

A Compact Multiband Monopole Antenna With a Defected Ground Plane

2008· article· en· W2159251629 on OpenAlexaff
Marco A. Antoniades, George V. Eleftheriades

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersIntel Corporation
KeywordsGround planeMonopole antennaPhysicsWidebandBandwidth (computing)Antenna (radio)Dipole antennaHelical antennaAntenna efficiencyTelecommunicationsComputer scienceOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A compact multiband antenna is proposed that consists of a printed circular disc monopole antenna with an L-shaped slot cut out of the ground, forming a defected ground plane. Analysis of the current distribution on the antenna reveals that at low frequencies the addition of the slot creates two orthogonal current paths, which are responsible for two additional resonances in the response of the antenna. By virtue of the orthogonality of these modes the antenna exhibits orthogonal pattern diversity, while enabling the adjacent resonances to be merged, forming a wideband low-frequency response and maintaining the inherent wideband high-frequency response of the monopole. The antenna exhibits a measured -10 dBS11bandwidth of 600 MHz from 2.68 to 3.28 GHz, and a bandwidth of 4.84 GHz from 4.74 to 9.58 GHz, while the total size of the antenna is only 24 times 28.3 mm. The efficiency is measured using a modified Wheeler cap method and is verified using the gain comparison method to be approximately 90% at both 2.7 and 5.5 GHz.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.179 · 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
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

Citations151
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation LettersSame topicAntenna Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207