Investigation on the effects of resistive loading on wrapped bow-tie antennas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The pulse radiating characteristic of a wrapped bow-tie antenna (WBA) and wrapped resistively loaded bow-tie antenna (WRLBA) is presented for impulse radar applications in this paper. The numerical analysis of the WRLBA is performed by comparing that of the WBA. The wrapped antennas are realized on a flexible substrate. The antennas are fed by an impedance tapered balun, which has an overall transmission loss of −1.4 dB over the balun length. The characteristics of the resistive loading to the wrapped antenna, such as reflection coefficient, reflected pulse in the time domain, voltage standing wave ratio, and input impedance, are experimentally investigated and compared with simulated results. The fidelity factor of the radiated electric field on the boresight direction for the WBA and WRLBA is calculated as 0.82 and 0.96, respectively. The wireless communication ability is evaluated by the transmission coefficient, group delay, boresight gain, and received waveform. The calculated fidelity factor of the received waveform for the WBA and WRLBA is 0.79 and 0.85, respectively. The average and variations of the group delay of both wrapped antennas are observed to be around 2.5 ns and less than 1.5 ns, 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".