Analysis of Schottky Multistage Voltage Doubler Rectifiers for RF Energy Harvesting Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multistage Voltage Doubler Rectifiers (MVDR) are known to increase the level of the output DC voltage of a Rectifying Antenna (rectenna). However, the RF / DC conversion efficiency is very sensitive to the internal electrical characteristics of the used diode. This paper then proposes an analysis of the performance of an MVDR according to the features of the Schottky diode. A Rectenna Figure of Merit (RFoM), considering the DC output voltage as well as the RF / DC conversion efficiency, is defined to analyze MVDRs with up to ten stages. This analysis makes it possible to obtain that the most effective rectifier diode differs depending on the number of stages of the rectifier. More specifically, it is observed that, for two stages, the most efficient diode is the Schottky diode HSMS2820. For MVDR with more than five stages, the SMS 7630 diode is more suitable for low input power levels (less than 5 dBm). It is also observed that, for power levels higher than 5 dBm, the HSMS2850 diode offers the best compromise in terms of output DC voltage and conversion efficiency.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".