Simple and High-Sensitivity Dielectric Constant Measurement Using a High-Directivity Microstrip Coupled-Line Directional Coupler
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simple methods using a microstrip coupled-line directional coupler (CLDC) are presented for dielectric constant measurements. The material under test (MUT) is placed on the coupled-line section of the coupler, and either the coupler’s coupling ( <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\lvert S_{31} \lvert $ </tex-math></inline-formula> ) or its isolation level ( <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\lvert S_{41} \lvert $ </tex-math></inline-formula> ) is considered as the sensor’s response. Putting different MUTs on the microstrip line leads to a change in the effective dielectric constant of the structure and consequently causing a change in the coupling coefficient. In addition, since the isolation level of a microstrip coupled-line coupler depends on the phase velocity difference between the substrate and the medium above the signal strips, putting different MUTs on the line significantly changes the isolation level. This change is significantly greater than the change in <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\lvert S_{21} \lvert $ </tex-math></inline-formula> level of a microstrip line when loaded with different MUTs. Validation of the method is presented through measurements for both solid and liquid MUTs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it