MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403936655 · doi:10.1109/icjece.2024.3475878

Design of Stubs in a Comb-Line Leaky-Wave Antenna for Minimizing Gain Variation at Broadside

2024· article· en· W4403936655 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ayaz Ahmad, Shanu Kumar, Jayanta Mukherjee

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMicrowave Engineering and Waveguides
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLine (geometry)PhysicsBroadsideAntenna (radio)OpticsTelecommunicationsGeometryMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, the effect of a two-section stub for minimizing gain variation near broadside frequency in a comb-line leaky-wave antenna (LWA) is investigated. Mathematical design conditions for stubs are derived based on the matched input impedance requirement of the unit cell. Based on the derived conditions, two different stubs (Case-I and Case-II) are designed and placed in the middle of the host transmission line (50 Ω delay line) to make comb-line unit cells (UC#1, and UC#2). The open stopband (OSB) suppression is investigated by analyzing the input impedance and the leakage constant of the unit cells. Next, the variation in the gain of the LWAs (LWA#1, and LWA#2) with the proposed stubs is compared with a comb-line LWA with the conventional radiating stub (CRS). The gain variation in LWA#1 is only 0.7 dB as compared to the 2.5 dB gain variation for LWA using CRSs. Moreover, the gain is improved by 2 dB near the broadside for LWA#2 as compared to LWA using CRS. In the entire analysis, the broadside frequency is chosen near 10 GHz.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.629

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.188
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer EngineeringSame topicMicrowave Engineering and WaveguidesFrench-language works237,207