MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2538938517 · doi:10.1109/icupc.1994.383160

Proximity effects on diversity antennas

2002· article· en· W2538938517 on OpenAlexaff
Tri Pham, K.G. Balmain

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity gainAntenna diversityReflector (photography)Antenna (radio)Diversity (politics)Ground planePlane (geometry)Computer scienceNoise (video)TelecommunicationsElectronic engineeringPhysicsMathematicsGeometryEngineeringOpticsFadingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proximity effects constitute a threat to the performance of a diversity antenna when it is operating under physically constricted, limited-area conditions which are typical of indoor environments. Two factors contribute to the degradation of the antenna performance: the reduction of the branch mean signal-to-noise ratios and the increase of the branch signal correlation. The overall loss of diversity gain can be evaluated from these factors. Theoretical investigations of a two-element space diversity antenna mounted on an infinite ground plane and an infinite corner reflector show that proximity effects (i.e. proximity to the ground plane or reflector) can result in a significant loss of diversity gain. The severity of the proximity effects depends an the spacing between the two elements, and on the location and orientation of the pair of elements.>

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)0.005
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.162 · 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

Citations2
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAntenna Design and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207