MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391582632 · doi:10.1109/tap.2024.3360637

Improving Beamforming Performance With Practical Phase Shifters Using Robust Mapping and Deep Learning

2024· article· en· W4391582632 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhase shift moduleBeamformingPhased arrayVoltageComputer scienceAntenna arrayAmplitudePhase (matter)Antenna (radio)Noise (video)Electronic engineeringAlgorithmControl theory (sociology)TelecommunicationsOpticsEngineeringPhysicsElectrical engineeringControl (management)Artificial intelligenceMicrowave

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the problem of beamforming and maximizing the phased array gain for practical phase shifters is addressed using a deep learning approach. For an ideal phase shifter, the amplitude is constant and the output phase changes linearly with the control voltage. However, the practical phase shifters show a nonlinear behavior in both amplitude and phase with respect to the control voltage. The main objective of this article is to design a deep neural network (DNN), which estimates the optimum voltage values of the phase shifter using the noisy data of the receiver antenna array. The proposed approach is general and extendible to any array geometry. Usually, the quality of the trained model is affected by large variations in the voltage values for certain adjacent directions of arrival (DOAs). To overcome this issue, we introduce the robust mapping technique, which avoids sudden changes in voltage values during the training process. The amplitude and phase data of a typical reflective-type phase shifter is measured for different control voltage values, to be used in the training process. The suggested algorithm is applied to a receiver array of four antennas with reflective-type phase shifters (RTPSs). The maximum array gain for different DOAs is very close to the optimum results showing the superior performance of the proposed method. Compared to the existing methods, the root mean square error (RMSE) of the array gain decreased to 0.0283. It is shown that the proposed method is more resilient to noise and performs substantially better than other methods in low SNR scenarios.

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 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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.796
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.210 · 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