Microwave Bladder Monitoring: Analysis of 3×2 Array and Impact of Antenna Location
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines the impact of antenna location when using microwave (MW) sensing technology to differentiate between a full and an empty bladder state. A model of the pelvic region, mimicking different tissue properties, was constructed using Ansys HFSS, for both empty and full bladder states. A <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$2 \times 3$</tex> conformal antenna array was placed on the skin of the pelvic model, and a frequency sweep from 1 GHz to 5 GHz was analyzed. It was observed that the largest differences in transmission coefficient between full and empty states occurred between corner antenna pairs not obscured by bone. The top corners produced a difference of 6.0 dB at 3.5 GHz. The diagonal pairs had differences of <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$\sim 3.4 \text{dB}$</tex> at <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$\sim 4.9 \text{GHz}$</tex>. The resonant frequency of the antenna in this model is 3.7 GHz. The reflection coefficients had the largest differences when centered on the bladder: <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$\sim 1.05 \text{dB}$</tex> at 3.7 GHz. These results highlight the importance of antenna position for achieving reliable bladder state detection and provide valuable insights for the development of wearable bladder monitoring devices.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".