Performance analysis and feed location optimization for enhanced isolation and polarization control in dual differentially fed antennas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an analysis of a low-profile dual differentially fed patch antenna, considering both differential impedance and pair-to-pair isolation, thereby mitigating the need for more complex feeding networks. A new relationship between differential pair-to-pair isolation at resonance versus feed location is revealed. This relation favors optimal pair-to-pair isolation over ideal impedance-matching conditions. The exciting port-to-patch center distance is shown to be significant in determining both the differential input impedance and pair-to-pair isolation. A differential pair-to-pair isolation greater than 38 dB is measured across the entire band from 9.17 GHz to 9.37 GHz. The polarization control of a dual, differentially fed antenna with full integration of off-the-shelf RF components is introduced. A cross-polarization (X-pol) ratio lower than -31 dB is achieved across the entire band for linear polarizations (LP) using RF baluns, while a left-hand circular polarization (LHCP) is achieved with an extra 90° hybrid coupler connected to the baluns. Despite the known poor isolation of the commercial hybrid coupler and its amplitude and phase imbalances, the achieved axial ratio (AR) is better than 1 dB across the entire band. • Investigate the effect of the feeding ports spacing (feed-center location) on the differential pair-to-pair isolation. • Identification of the optimal feed location that ensures the highest isolation performance. • Achievement of a high cross-polarization (X-Pol) ratio and low axial ratio (AR) across the entire operational bandwidth. • Comparison of E-field and surface current distributions in dual differential-fed vs. conventional two-port antennas. • Validation of classic single differential-fed closed-form model for applicability to proposed dual differential-fed antenna.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".