MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2319130819 · doi:10.1109/tcsii.2016.2551547

Improving Load Range of Dual-Band Impedance Matching Networks Using Load-Healing Concept

2016· article· en· W2319130819 on OpenAlexaff
Mohammad A. Maktoomi, Mohammad Hashmi, Fadhel M. Ghannouchi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Circuits & Systems II Express Briefs · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpedance matchingElectrical impedanceMatching (statistics)Multi-band deviceCladding (metalworking)DielectricLoad balancing (electrical power)Computer scienceElectronic engineeringMaterials scienceTopology (electrical circuits)MathematicsElectrical engineeringTelecommunicationsEngineeringComposite materialOptoelectronicsAntenna (radio)GeometryStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel and very simple scheme to mend conventional dual-band impedance matching networks is presented. It involves the employment of a load-modifying element (load-healer) so as to extend the range of frequency-dependent complex load that could be matched. Two simple load-healers incorporated in the conventional T-network are used to illustrate the concept. The proposed scheme can be successfully applied in many situations where conventional matching networks are severely limited. Two prototypes operating concurrently at 1 and 2 GHz are designed corresponding to the two types of load-healer. They are implemented on FR4 substrate having a dielectric constant of 4.6, a substrate height of 1.5 mm, and a 35-μm copper cladding. The prototypes exhibit good agreement between their EM simulated and measured results.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations38
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Circuits & Systems II Express BriefsSame topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207