MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324291219 · doi:10.2528/pierb22121903

Design of Waveguide Applicators Using a Quarter-wave Transformer Prototype

2023· article· en· W4324291219 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mykola Zhuk, Jonathan Paradis

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress In Electromagnetics Research B · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformerQuarter (Canadian coin)Computer scienceAcousticsOpticsElectrical engineeringPhysicsVoltageEngineeringHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a design methodology for waveguide applicators to maximize microwave power deposition into human tissues. The optimized applicators can be used in the experimental studies of the biological effects of exposure to electromagnetic radiation in the frequency range from 6 GHz to 100 GHz. The design methodology relies on the provision of reflectionless matching of a dissipative waveguide load, achieved by employing a matching network based on a quarter-wave transformer prototype. The prototype is synthesized by knowledge of the voltage standing wave ratio (VSWR) evaluated in the unmatched loaded waveguide. A key difference from the conventional synthesis procedure is that in our design approach, the characteristic impedance of the first transformer section is given, and we have to not only determine the characteristic impedances of the remaining sections, but also establish the output load. A solution of this synthesis problem and the process of converting the transformer prototype into a waveguide structure are described. The physical structure can be implemented according to provided sample models of waveguide WR137 applicators employing symmetric inductive or capacitive posts. The matched waveguide applicators are easy to manufacture, and according to the results from computational simulations, they demonstrate superior performance compared to the unmatched waveguides. Limitations of our designs (narrow bandwidth, dependence on the type of tissues encountered, limited potential for miniaturization) are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProgress In Electromagnetics Research BSame topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207