MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2316280905 · doi:10.1109/mmm.2014.2321102

The Sound the Air Makes: High-Performance Tunable Filters Based on Air-Cavity Resonators

2014· article· en· W2316280905 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Microwave Magazine · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityCOM DEV International
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResonatorElectronic engineeringMicroelectromechanical systemsFilter (signal processing)Electrical engineeringBlock (permutation group theory)Computer scienceEngineeringMaterials scienceOptoelectronics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tunable filters have a wide range of applications from software-defined radio to reconfigurable satellite payloads. They are a key building block for any flexible transceivers. A variety of tunable filter technologies can be found in the literature. Examples include: planar tunable filters employing solid-state or microelectromechanical systems (MEMS) varactors [1]-[6], and ferroelectric variable capacitor tuned coaxial filters [7]. The choice of technology is driven by the application. In this article, we focus on applications requiring high performance, including low loss, high-power handling capability, and high stability, mainly for communications satellites or wireless base stations. These requirements immediately rule out any low-quality factor (Q) technologies. For instance, besides low Q, planar-type tunable filters typically suffer from poor selectivity and transmission-response variation over the tuning range. Technologies based on substrate-integrated-waveguide (SIW) offer better Q than microstrip circuits and advantage in packaging [8]-[10]. However, in most cases, their Q is comparable to strip-line circuits with the same volume. Air-cavity resonators, on the other hand, offer high-Q in the range of thousands to tens of thousands and high-power handling and are therefore one of the obvious choices. The addition of each requirement, such as power, selectivity, vibration, and temperature stability, further limits available choices. We are not aware of an existing technology that satisfies all these requirements. The search for a viable solution for the targeted high-end applications is indeed a difficult journey, with years of experience accumulation from past good and bad designs.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.356
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.180 · 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