Design of Circularly Polarized Array Antennas with a Rotated Sequential Feeding Network for Antenna-in-Package Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, a circularly polarized antenna-in-package array antenna with an expandable axial ratio bandwidth was proposed using a rotating sequential feed structure. Each antenna in the proposed design had a hexagonal shape for a triangular array configuration and featured a circular radiating patch. In addition, it was fed by two pins through a feed line with a 90° phase difference to implement circular polarization characteristics. A 2×2 subarray antenna was designed to enhance the axial ratio bandwidth by rotating each antenna by 90° and ensuring beam symmetry. This maintained stable axial ratio characteristics. A 90° phase distribution layer was used to rearrange the feed positions and correct the phase differences, allowing the use of conventional beam steering algorithms. A 4×4 array antenna model was designed based on the proposed configuration, and the antenna characteristics were analyzed. The simulation results showed that the 90° phase distribution layer exhibited an error within 5° in the target bandwidth, and the axial ratio bandwidth expanded from 7.1 % to 75 %. Furthermore, during beam steering within the range of θ0=60°, the axial ratio characteristics remained stable compared with those of conventional array antennas.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".