MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3030578636 · doi:10.1109/access.2020.2998439

Non-Reciprocity View of the MIMO Antenna Arrays in Transmitting and Receiving Modes Using the Maximized Unique Receiving Pattern Theory Resulted by Angle-Wise Array Factor

2020· article· en· W3030578636 on OpenAlex
Babak Molaei, Ahmed A. Kishk

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Optimization
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMIMOReciprocity (cultural anthropology)Mode (computer interface)UniquenessRadiation patternComputer scienceAntenna arrayAntenna (radio)GratingTopology (electrical circuits)Electronic engineeringAlgorithmMathematicsControl theory (sociology)TelecommunicationsPhysicsOpticsEngineeringMathematical analysisChannel (broadcasting)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new approach to employ MIMO array behavior in system design calculations by distinguishing the transmitting and receiving modes' characteristics is presented. It shows that the conventional array formulation complies merely with the transmitting mode behavior of MIMO arrays, while the newly proposed formulation eases the estimation of the receiving mode behavior by introducing the Angle Wise Array Factor (AWAF). A novel theory of “Non-reciprocity view of transmitting and receiving modes in MIMO arrays” is being discussed along with “Pattern non-uniqueness in transmitting mode” and “Pattern uniqueness in receiving mode” theories. The grating lobe definition is also re-introduced, proposing that this definition is supposed to be reserved merely for transmitting mode.

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.823
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.217 · 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