MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801515211 · doi:10.1109/tmtt.2018.2825395

Half-Mode Composite Waveguide

2018· article· en· W2801515211 on OpenAlexafffund
Jiapin Guo, Ke Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWaveguideElectronic circuitMaterials sciencePlanarOpticsElectrical impedanceBandwidth (computing)Insertion lossComposite numberCoplanar waveguideW bandMicrowaveOptoelectronicsPhysicsTelecommunicationsElectrical engineeringComputer scienceEngineeringComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a guided-wave structure, the half-mode composite waveguide (HMCW) is proposed and presented. Similar to the conventional mode composite waveguide (MCW), the HMCW also has an inner and outer waveguides, each working in its half-mode operation, respectively. In the HMCW structure, the signal propagates in the inner waveguide with quasi-TE0.5-0mode and along the outer waveguide with the quasi-TEM mode. The HMCW's half-mode operation principle, impedance, loss, and propagation characteristics including higher order modes are analyzed. Compared to its full-size counterpart, the HMCW only occupies half the space, when operating within the same frequency band. Simulation results show that the transmission loss of the HMCW is comparable to that of the full-size MCW. Thus, it is also suitable for both lowand high-frequency design and applications. To measure and integrate the HMCW with other planar circuits, a joint feeding network for the HMCW is also proposed. Its circuit prototype is fabricated on three layers of substrate using a multilayer substrate integration technique. This joint feeding network can simultaneously excite the inner and outer waveguides, respectively, in an independent manner. In measurements, both the inner and outer waveguides are transitioned to microtrip lines, and a good matching is achieved from 4.4 to 11.2 GHz with a relative bandwidth of 87.2% for the outer waveguide at low frequency and from 18.6 to 32.6 GHz with a relative bandwidth of 54.7% for the inner waveguide at high frequency, respectively.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and TechniquesSame topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207