MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404627469 · doi:10.1109/tap.2024.3499367

Compact In-Band Full-Duplex Implantable Antenna for Wireless Capsule Endoscopy

2024· article· en· W4404627469 on OpenAlexaff
Abdullah Alshammari, Amjad Iqbal, Abdul Basir, Muath Al‐Hasan, Roy B. V. B. Simorangkir, Mourad Nedil, Ismail Ben Mabrouk

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicWireless Body Area Networks
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Abitibi-Témiscamingue
FundersRoyal Society
KeywordsCapsule endoscopyWirelessAntenna (radio)Directional antennaTelecommunicationsOmnidirectional antennaDuplex (building)Computer scienceAcousticsElectrical engineeringPhysicsMedicineRadiologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study presents an ultraminiaturized implantable in-band full-duplex (IBFD) antenna, designed for wireless capsule endoscopy (WCE) applications. Through the integration of semicircular slots and shorting pins, the antenna achieves a small volume of 7.17 mm3 ($\pi \times $(3 mm)$^{2} \times 0.254$mm), surpassing the state-of-the-art in compactness. Simulations of the proposed design are conducted within a human body phantom to demonstrate the antenna’s operation at 2.45 GHz. Radiation patterns from both ports are nearly omnidirectional, and an isolation level of greater than 28 dB is achieved. Our results indicate that the antenna can establish reliable wireless communication over distances exceeding 8 m, with a 10-dB margin at both ports. The specific absorption rate (SAR) values at 2.45 GHz are found to be 29.7 W/kg at 1 W input power. Experimental validation using minced pork demonstrated a good agreement with simulation results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Antennas and PropagationSame topicWireless Body Area NetworksFrench-language works237,207