MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6976722874 · doi:10.60692/kjya5-f5k29

Novel Microstrip Bandpass Filter for 5G mm-Wave wireless communications

2023· article· en· W6976722874 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueGreater South Information System · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSex and Gender in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBand-pass filterStub (electronics)Bandwidth (computing)Filter (signal processing)Insertion lossWirelessCenter frequencyReflection coefficientHigh-pass filter

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the design of a novel bandpass filter specifically tailored for 5G mm-Wave communications. The filter utilizes a rectangle loop resonator loaded with a stepped impedance line stub at its center. The overall dimensions of the filter are 11.22×13mm2. The design incorporates Rogers RT/duroid 5880 substrate with a relative dielectric constant of 2.2, a loss tangent of 0.0009, and a thickness of 0.64 mm. The resulting filter exhibits a center frequency at 22.65 GHz, with a bandwidth of 10.5 GHz and a fractional bandwidth (FBW) of 46.36%. The reflection coefficient is approximately -39.12 dB, while the insertion loss of about -0.59 dB. We conducted a parametric study to choose the optimal value concerning the form and size of the introduced slot. To evaluate the filter's performance, simulations and assessments were carried out using the High-Frequency Structure Simulator (HFSS). The obtained results demonstrate the filter's suitability for 5G applications in various countries, including the United States (24.75-25.25 GHz), United Kingdom (26 GHz), Australia (24.25-27.5 GHz), Canada (26.5-27.5 GHz), Europe (24.5-27.5 GHz), China (24.75-27.5 GHz), Japan (26.6-27 GHz), and India (24.25-27.5 GHz).

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.208
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.105 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGreater South Information SystemSame topicSex and Gender in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207