Ultracompact Quarter-Mode SIW Self-Hexaplexing Antenna for C-Band and X-Band Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this letter, an ultracompact substrate integrated waveguide (SIW)-based hexaplexing antenna, operating at six distinct frequencies (4, 5.8, 6.6, 7.8, 9.8, 10.68 GHz) is proposed. It is made up of four compacted square-like quarter-mode SIW (S-QMSIW) resonators, and two triangular (T-QMSIW) elements. Their compactness is accomplished through the inclusion of rectangular slots at the closed-off ends of each resonator, resulting in increased shunt capacitance. As such, the resonance frequencies shift to the lower spectrum of their fundamental frequency ranges, forming the full hexaband system, with only 0.14 <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"><tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\lambda _{g}^{2}$</tex-math></inline-formula> in size. In addition, the minimum attained isolation level is 27 dB. At the intended frequencies, the maximum realized gain and efficiency are 4.9, 5.11, 5.4, 5.43, 5.32, and 5.3 dBi, for gain; 94%, 94.3%, 95%, 96.5%, 94%, and 95.7% for efficiency, at 4, 5.8, 6.6, 7.8, 9.8, and 10.68 GHz, respectively. In addition, a reliable equivalent circuit model is designed to confirm the proposed methodology, and the final design is fabricated. The simulation results are in good agreement with the measured ones. The proposed design proved its flexibility in terms of independent frequency tuning, thus making it an appealing choice for ultracompact communication systems.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".