MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399663951 · doi:10.1117/12.3017641

Compact turnstile quad-ridge orthomode transducer with octave bandwidth for radio astronomy applications

2024· article· en· W4399663951 on OpenAlexaff
Nasrin Tasouji, Sara Salem Hesari, Doug Henke, L. B. G. Knee, Thomas Sieverding, A. Densmore, Jens Børnemann

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicRadio Astronomy Observations and Technology
Canadian institutionsHerzberg Institute of AstrophysicsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurnstileBandwidth (computing)TransducerRadio astronomyOctave (electronics)Radio telescopePhysicsElectrical engineeringEngineeringAcousticsComputer scienceTelecommunicationsAstronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A novel wideband orthomode transducer (OMT) featuring a folded-arm turnstile junction covering a 2:1 frequency band is employed to achieve an effective structure while meeting the strict OMT requirements for radio astronomy applications. The turnstile junction is designed with two symmetry planes to ensure separation between perpendicular polarizations and the effective management of higher order modes. Within the throat of the turnstile junction, stepped cylinders serve as scattering elements and matching stubs to ensure efficient impedance matching between the quad-ridge circular waveguide at the input and the single-ridge rectangular waveguides at the output. The folded arms play a pivotal role in achieving excellent matching while significantly reducing the overall size. Considering the significance of developing wideband radio astronomy receivers with minimal noise, this design demonstrates a precisely engineered compact OMT, with tuned bends, junctions, and delivers simulated return loss better than 20 dB while maintaining cross-polarization performance well below 65 dB within the specified 20-40 GHz frequency range.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.840

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadio Astronomy Observations and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207