MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168410492 · doi:10.1109/map.2010.5687509

On the Scattering Analysis Methods of and Reflection Characteristics for an AMC/AEC Surface

2010· article· en· W2168410492 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Foroozesh, L. Shafai

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Antennas and Propagation Magazine · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Antenna and Metasurface Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHFSSOpticsPolarization (electrochemistry)Plane waveMethod of moments (probability theory)Reflection coefficientScatteringPerfect conductorFloquet theoryConductorPhysicsComputational physicsMathematical analysisGeometryMathematicsEngineeringMicrostrip antennaElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper initially presents an analysis of the electromagnetic scattering from a grounded dielectric slab loaded by a periodic conducting-strip grating using Floquet's modal expansions. The analysis treats any incident wave in an arbitrary plane, and having arbitrary angle and polarization. Explicit expressions are derived for the reflection coefficients of all harmonic modes. It is shown that this method is equivalent to the Galerkin Method of Moments (MoM) in the spectral domain. This means both methods result in the same matrix equation to be solved for the coefficients of the surface-current-density basis functions. Next, using this analysis method, the effects of various parameters on the reflection-coefficient phase of the aforementioned periodic structure is thoroughly studied. The parameters studied include the widths, dielectric permittivities, and thicknesses of the strips, as well as the plane, angle, and polarization of the incident wave. This parametric study shows that this structure can act as either an artificial magnetic conductor (AMC) or an artificial electric conductor (AEC), depending on the angle, polarization, and plane of the incident wave. However, the structure may not be able to maintain the distinct characteristics of an artificial magnetic conductor or an artificial electric conductor for all planes, angles, and polarizations of the incident wave. Some of the results are compared to the those obtained by commercial software packages, such as Ansoft's HFSS and Designer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.576
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Antennas and Propagation MagazineSame topicAdvanced Antenna and Metasurface TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207