Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Algorithms improve accuracy and computational efficiency in wire antennas and corner reflector analysis, suggesting better design outcomes.
Problem statement. Antennas and scatterers play a critical role in telecommunications technologies. Accurate analysis is essential for optimizing designs, reducing costs, and predicting real-world behavior. Characteristic mode analysis is a widely used method for studying these interactions, offering insights into how the structural shape and parameters affect radiation and scattering characteristics. Traditional characteristic mode analysis often relies on modal significance to identify significance modes; however, this approach does not fully consider the properties of the eigencurrent and the excitation source, which can lead to potential inaccuracies in determining significant modes.Aim. Develop an algorithm to identify the most significant modes for analysing the characteristics of antenna and scatterers when using characteristic mode analysis and presents the verification of the analysis results of the corner reflector structure using characteristic mode analysis and the effectiveness of the algorithm used.Results. Two algorithms have been developed to improve both the accuracy and the computational efficiency in analyzing wire antenna and scatterers using characteristic mode analysis. The first algorithm considers the properties of the eigencurrent and the excitation source to determine the significant modes. The second algorithm reduces the computational cost while maintaining high precision. The accuracy and effectiveness of these two algorithms have been demonstrated in the analysis of dipole antenna and a variety of corner reflector as scatterers.Practical significance. The proposed algorithms can be used to identify significant modes in the analysis of wire antenna and scatterer structures, thereby making the optimization of these structures using characteristic mode analysis more accurate.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: