Antenna systems for IoT applications: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In smart homes, industrial automation, healthcare, agriculture, and environmental monitoring, IoT antenna systems improve communication efficiency and dependability. IoT antenna systems affect network performance and connection by affecting gain, directivity, bandwidth, efficiency, and impedance matching. Dipole, patch, spiral, metamaterial-based, and other antenna types are tested in IoT settings to identify their applicability, benefits, and downsides. Current antenna technology has challenges with frequency, bandwidth, size, weight, material choices, and energy efficiency, requiring new solutions. According to the study, interference control, power consumption, and dynamic IoT adaptation research are inadequate. Metamaterials, nanomaterials, and 3D printing may circumvent these antenna design limitations. AI and machine learning can improve antenna design real-time optimization and performance in complex settings. The paper explores how standards and regulatory frameworks affect IoT antenna system development to ensure future designs meet a fast-growing market. For the growing range of IoT applications, this research suggests more flexible and reconfigurable antennas that can function across numerous frequency bands. The report emphasizes antenna material and design innovation to improve durability, cut costs, and scale manufacturing. This research tackles these key elements to enable the next generation of antenna systems to meet IoT technology's expanding needs and increase networked devices' functionality, efficiency, and integration across industries. This comprehensive approach helps identify current trends and concerns and prepares for future IoT antenna system advancements, enabling smarter, more connected, and more efficient technologies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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".