A Dual-Polarized Magnetoelectric Dipole Array Based on Printed Ridge Gap Waveguide With Dual-Polarized Split-Ring Resonator Lens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, a 1x4 dual-polarized magnetoelectric (ME) dipole antenna array is proposed. The antenna is excited by a dual-polarized fork-shaped microstrip line based on printed ridge gap waveguide technology. To achieve additional gain, a dual-polarized split-ring resonator (SRR) is designed, which has a mu-near zero (MNZ) feature. This scatterer works as a meta-lens to convert the radiated spherical wave to a plane wave for both polarizations. Integrating four layers of the proposed inclusions on top of the ME dipole antenna results in an increase in the antenna gain by a maximum of 3 dB. The proposed 1 x 4 antenna array was fabricated and tested, and the measured reflection coefficient at Port 1 is less than -10 dB over the frequency band of 28-35 GHz, while the measured realized gain varies from 14.3 to 15.4 dBi, and the measured radiation efficiency varies from 78% to 88%. The measured reflection coefficient at Port 2 for the orthogonal polarization is less than -8 dB over the frequency band of 28-35 GHz, with a measured gain of 14.8-16 dBi, and the measured radiation efficiency varies from 81% to 90%.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".