MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2546488777 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2016.7726732

Practical accuracy of directivity, efficiency and gain from the spherical near field

2016· article· en· W2546488777 on OpenAlexaff
Roshanak Zabihi, Rodney G. Vaughan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsSierra Wireless (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnechoic chamberDirectivityAntenna gainCalibrationAntenna (radio)Computer scienceConfusionAcousticsAntenna measurementAntenna apertureDipole antennaElectronic engineeringPhysicsEngineeringTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measurement error in an anechoic chamber causes uncertainty in measured antenna parameters and various calibration techniques are used to minimize these. For the user, there is usually confusion as to what is being measured and presented, when using a commercial system. Here we compare the results from two methods of calibration used in the Satimo-SG64 chamber, a widely-used instrument for both research and certification. In particular, we discuss the differences in the calibration approaches and the results of the gain, efficiency and directivity for a low-gain standard antenna.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.960

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207