MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402592318 · doi:10.1109/ojcs.2024.3463190

Exploring the Potential of Deep-Learning and Machine-Learning in Dual-Band Antenna Design

2024· article· en· W4402592318 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 Open Journal of the Computer Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDual (grammatical number)Deep learningAntenna (radio)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents an in-depth exploration of machine learning (ML) and deep learning (DL) for the optimization and design of dual-band antennas in Internet of Things (IoT) applications. Dual-band antennas, which are essential for the functionality of current and forthcoming flexible wireless communication systems, face increasing complexity and design challenges as demands and requirements for IoT-connected devices become more challenging. The study demonstrates how artificial intelligence (AI) can streamline the antenna design process, enabling customization for specific frequency ranges or performance characteristics without exhaustive manual tuning. By utilizing ML and DL tools, this research not only enhances the efficiency of the design process but also achieves optimal antenna performance with significant time savings. The integration of AI in antenna design marks a notable advancement over traditional methods, offering a systematic approach to achieving dual-band functionality tailored to modern communication needs. We approached the antenna design as a regression problem, using the reflection coefficient, operating frequency, bandwidth, and voltage standing wave ratio as input parameters. The ML and DL models then are used to predict the corresponding design parameters for the antenna by using 1,000 samples, from which 700 are allocated for training and 300 for testing. This effectiveness of this approach is demonstrated through the successful application of various ML techniques, including Fine Gaussian Support Vector Machines (SVM), as well as Regressor and Residual Neural Networks (ResNet) with different activation functions, to optimize the design of a dual-band T-shaped monopole antenna, thereby substantiating AI's transformative potential in antenna design.

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)0.001
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 score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.266

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.191 · 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