Modeling a complex antenna on a handheld telephone close to human tissue
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Design-development and performance evaluation of antennas on handheld telephones can be done experimentally or numerically. Numerical modeling approach or a combination of experiment and numerical modeling, offer many advantages compared with purely experimental approach, which has been often used till now. However, modeling poses many challenges and in order to be considered reliable has to be verified. In this work, modeling of an antenna consisting of two helices is verified by a comparison with measurements made in the laboratory of the handset manufacturer, and by use of two different computer codes. The numerical method used in this investigation is the finite difference time domain (FDTD). A comparison of the measured (in manufacturer's laboratory) electric and magnetic field in four planes at distances 1-4 cm from the antenna with the computed values shows agreement within 15% (which corresponds to the uncertainty in measurements). This agreement is for two operational positions of the antenna in free space. Performance of the handset antenna in the vicinity of the user's head is evaluated. Investigations include the input impedance, far-field radiation pattern and power deposited in the human tissue. The influences of the ear shape and various positions of the handset with respect to the user's head have been evaluated.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".