MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2343659612 · doi:10.4236/ijcns.2016.94007

Optimization of Leaky Feeder Slot Spacing for Better Beam Forming in Mines and Tunnels

2016· article· en· W2343659612 on OpenAlexaff
Noha Hassan, Wisam Farjow, Xavier Fernando

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Communications Network and System Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBent molecular geometryBroadbandSide lobeBeam (structure)Radius of curvatureChannel (broadcasting)CurvatureAntenna (radio)RADIUSWirelessPower (physics)Main lobeComputer scienceGenetic algorithmAcousticsEngineeringPhysicsOpticsTelecommunicationsMathematicsStructural engineeringGeometryComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The radiating cable (or leaky feeder) is the leading solution for distributed broadband wireless access in underground mines and tunnels. The traditional radiating cable has equally spaced slots along its axis radiating evenly. However, with the new requirement for tracking and localization of miners, this paper shows how to modify the leaky feeder to function as a beam forming antenna array by appropriately optimizing the slot spacing. Optimizing the leaky feeder slot distances using Genetic algorithm has a good impact on the channel parameters, making it an excellent choice for leaky feeder antennas. Linear, as well as bent practical leaky feeder shapes, were considered, and we tested five different optimization algorithms and compared side lobe energies, varying the slot distance which had an impact on side lobe level. Also, we derived the expression for the BER, spectral efficiency and throughput considering a time-varying wireless channel. We observed that as the radius of curvature of the feeder increased (approaching a straight line), the spectral efficiency decreased as expected. Interestingly different optimization algorithms perform differently at different carrier frequencies. An optimization method should be chosen according to the required goal to be achieved (maintaining uniform equal power along the cable, or a more directed beam, or using a certain frequency of operation).

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations10
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Communications Network and System SciencesSame topicAntenna Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207