MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W578365045 · doi:10.26077/66jn-6f79

Novel Collapsible Lens Antenna Design for Smallsat Applications

2025· article· en· W578365045 on OpenAlexaff
N. Sultan, Guy Séguin, Peter Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - USU (Utah State University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLens (geology)Antenna (radio)Computer scienceEmphasis (telecommunications)Software deploymentSurface (topology)OpticsEngineeringTelecommunicationsPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When an antenna of large aperture is required for a small-satellite application, this antenna is most conveniently realized as a collapsible structure. This can be implemented as space-fed antenna (a reflector or lens). The lens antenna has particular advantages, because the lens can be realized in the form of thin copper circuits printed on a flexible membrane. A further advantage of the lens is that it is relatively insensitive to the exact surface profile which is achieved after deployment. Different types of printed structures have been analyzed in order to determine the optimal design strategy for a printed, collapsible lens. In order to simplify the mechanical design of the collapsible structure itself, a major emphasis of the study has been to arrive at a design for which the electrical performance of the lens is essentially independent of the profile of the lens surface, and also of the distance between this surface and the primary feed device. The electrical performance has been calculated for promising candidate lens designs.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.186 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - USU (Utah State University)Same topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207