MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2518484100 · doi:10.1049/iet-map.2016.0118

Design of band‐rejected UWB planar antenna with integrated Bluetooth band

2016· article· en· W2518484100 on OpenAlexaff
Swati Varun Yadav, A. K. Gautam, Binod Kumar Kanaujia, Karumudi Rambabu

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Microwaves Antennas & Propagation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBluetoothPlanarAntenna (radio)Electronic engineeringElectrical engineeringEngineeringComputer scienceTelecommunicationsPhysicsWireless

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, a compact monopole antenna along with Bluetooth band and a band notched characteristic for ultra wideband (UWB) applications is designed. The antenna consists of a triangular shaped patch, an L‐shaped ground plane and a tapered microstrip feedline to obtain UWB operation. An additional resonance is excited for the Bluetooth band (2.4–2.48 GHz) by attaching an L‐shaped strip to the radiator. Further, a C‐shaped slit is etched in the radiator to restrict electromagnetic interference at IEEE INSAT/Super‐Extended C‐band from 6.7–7.1 GHz. The size of the antenna is only 13 × 24 × 1.6 mm 3 . A prototype of the proposed design is fabricated to validate the performance of the antenna. Measured results show that the antenna successfully operates over Bluetooth and entire UWB bands except the IEEE INSAT/Super‐Extended C‐band. A large bandwidth of 21.4 GHz from 3.1 to 24.5 GHz for UWB band is obtained. Current distribution on the antenna is used to develop design equations, and analysed the effect of L‐shaped strip and C‐shaped slit on the antenna operation. The simple structure and small size of the antenna makes it suitable for most of the wireless communication systems.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.879

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations18
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Microwaves Antennas & PropagationSame topicAntenna Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207