MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288058379 · doi:10.1109/tap.2022.3161463

Improving Compact Short Backfire Antenna Gain and Cross-Polarization Using Choke and Ring Cavity Loading

2022· article· en· W4288058379 on OpenAlexafffund
Amirbahador Mansoori, Dustin Isleifson, L. Shafai

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCMC Microsystems
KeywordsAntenna gainOpticsPhysicsBandwidth (computing)Dipole antennaAntenna factorComputer scienceTelecommunicationsAntenna (radio)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present two designs that improve the gain and cross-polarization performance of the waveguide-fed short backfire (SBF) antenna by introducing a choke (SBF-2) and by loading the cavity with a metallic ring feature (SBF-2-Ring). A series of parametric simulation studies on antenna dimensions provides information on how to improve the antenna gain and cross-polarization performance while simultaneously extending the impedance bandwidth. For SBF-2, the peak gain was 16.6 dBi, the minimum cross-polarization ratio was −23.8 dB, and the maximum impedance bandwidth was 27.3%, with a gain bandwidth of 19.2%. For SBF-2-Ring, the peak gain was 15.8 dBi, the minimum cross-polarization ratio was −29.1 dB, and the maximum impedance bandwidth was 43.5%, with a gain bandwidth of 31.8%. The concepts were verified by designing, fabricating, and testing two prototypes in the microwave C-band. Excellent agreement between simulation and measurement was achieved. The measured gain for SBF-2-Ring was >14 dBi for 4.7–6.2 GHz and the worst case cross polarization in the diagonal plane was <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$&lt; -22$ </tex-math></inline-formula> dB for 5.3–5.8 GHz. Cross-polarization in the principal planes has significantly greater bandwidth and the worst case analysis is presented to give limitations on the performance.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score0.822

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and PropagationSame topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207