An Analytical Model for the Contribution of Small Scatterers to Open-Ended Coaxial Probe Measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The open-ended coaxial probe (OECP) technique is one of the most commonly used methods for the characterization of homogeneous media properties, especially in the biomedical sciences. However, when considering inhomogeneous media, the effect of the heterogeneity on the probe terminal admittance is unclear, making the measured admittance difficult to interpret and relate to the properties of the medium. In this article, we present an analytical model for the contribution of an isotropic scatterer embedded in an otherwise homogeneous medium to the probe admittance. We utilize rigorous scattering theory and various approximations to obtain simplified, closed-form expressions. Using the obtained results, we present a method to accurately extract the scatterer properties from a measurement of the admittance. In addition, we define the sensing depth and show how it can be mapped as a function of the expected scatterer properties. Full-wave simulations are used to verify the proposed model, paving a path for further generalization to additional scenarios of open-coaxial probe sensing of an inhomogeneous medium.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".