MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4368363625 · doi:10.4071/001c.74553

Direct-Write Printed Wearable Metasurfaces

2023· article· en· W4368363625 on OpenAlexaff
Adria L. Kajenski, Guinevere Strack, Shahriar Khushrushahi, Alkim Akyurtlu

Bibliographic record

VenueIMAPSource Proceedings · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsHatch (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOhmMaterials scienceInkwellCoatingElectrical conductorComposite materialThread (computing)OptoelectronicsElectrical engineeringMechanical engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Direct-write printing was utilized in fabricating a wearable metasurface for frequency filtering at 6 GHz. Using radio frequency (RF) performance and sheet resistance, Rs as performance metrics, the printed metasurfaces were subjected to wash cycle and longevity testing. The metasurface was printed on two woven nylon industrial fabrics (70D (EX) and 200D (BW) thread masses) featuring a polyurethane (PU) coating on one side. Two conductive inks, CM127-48 (Creative Materials) and PE876 (Dupont) were printed on the fabrics and tested for Rs , RF performance, wash cycle stability, and longevity. Rs values for CM127-48 on EX and BW were similar (0.083±0.013 and 0.088±0.031 ohm/sq, respectively), while PE876 had higher Rs , on BW than EX (0.080±0.015 and 0.35±0.06 ohm/s). RF performance revealed that S21 magnitudes were at least −30 dB for all four ink–fabric combinations, in agreement with simulations. Wash cycle testing of PE876 on EX and BW revealed a comparable decrease in S21 magnitude for both fabrics. However, BW samples exhibited minimal shifts in peak frequency. Longevity tests on the four ink–fabric combinations demonstrated that S21 magnitudes were at least −29.5 dB, with the smallest change in magnitude for the CM127-48–EX sample. Materials selection may be tailored for various design goals in wearable electronics.

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)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIMAPSource ProceedingsSame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207