A Pneumatically Controlled Reconfigurable Antenna With Three States of Polarization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many of the existing antennas described in current literature utilize PIN diodes to achieve switchable polarization. In realizing more elaborate reconfigurable antennas, the biasing structures for these DC-controlled components become more complex, which leads to limitations in the RF design as well as losses and undesired radiation. Other reconfigurable technologies, such as MEMS switches and liquid crystals, could be chosen for a particular application depending on various trade-offs, for example efficiency and ease of implementation. An alternative system is a recently developed scheme of using pneumatically controlled solid dielectric slugs, which is low-loss and immune to RF distortion, and eliminates the need for DC biasing structures. To demonstrate the viability of this system, it was incorporated in the design of a reconfigurable ring slot antenna capable of three polarization states (LP/LHCP/RHCP) at 2.4 GHz. The measured axial-ratio bandwidth was 5%, which is comparable to similar low-profile antennas. The simulated and measured antenna performance at all three states showed strong correlation. The pneumatic actuation of four slugs inside a channel to realize the three different states was successfully implemented, demonstrating that pneumatic slug control technology is suitable for inclusion in reconfigurable antennas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
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.
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".