Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 5 minor 19 references

A Corrugated All-Metal Vivaldi Antenna for 5G Phased Array Applications

T0 review · 5 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that adding nine edge corrugations to each element of a 4×4 all-metal Vivaldi array suppresses surface currents, reduces central-element mutual coupling, and improves return loss, gain, and radiation efficiency across…

desk verdict A compact simulation-only comparison of corrugated versus plain all-metal Vivaldi arrays; the central mechanism is plausible but the paper oversells its evidence and hides key modeling details. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.03002 v1 pith:AQPF6X2U submitted 2025-02-05 eess.SP physics.app-ph

Mahyar Mehri Pashaki , Mohammad Hossein Koohi Ghamsari , Alireza Mallahzadeh , Gabriele Gradoni , Mohsen Khalily This is my paper · ORCID
classification eess.SPphysics.app-ph
keywords 5GphasedarrayVivaldiantennabroadbandcorrugationmutualcouplingall-metal28GHz
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper claims that cutting nine narrow slots, called corrugations, along the edges of an all-metal Vivaldi antenna aperture suppresses surface currents that otherwise leak toward the feed and into neighboring elements. In a simulated 4×4 array, this suppression lowers the mutual coupling (signal leakage between elements) among the four central elements and improves their return loss, VSWR, radiation efficiency, and gain across the 26–30 GHz band. The design is proposed as a 28 GHz phased-array element for 5G, with beam steering from -30 to +30 degrees. The results are entirely from full-wave simulation; no prototype or measured data are reported.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the corrugation pattern: nine rectangular edge slots ($L_{s1}$–$L_{s9}$, width $W_s = 0.4$ mm) cut along the exponential taper of the slotline. The antenna is an antipodal Vivaldi, meaning two flared all-metal arms facing each other across a tapered slot with no dielectric substrate. The taper, defined by $y = -(w_a/2)\exp((1/L_s)\log_e(w_t/w_a)x)$, performs the impedance match from the 50-ohm port toward free space. The corrugations lengthen the effective electrical path at the aperture and interrupt longitudinal surface-current flow, so fewer currents propagate from the radiating slot toward the element ports and into neighboring elements; this is the mechanism claimed to recover the array's bandwidth.

What would settle it

Fabricate the 4×4 corrugated array with a physical coaxial-to-slotline feed and measure S11, S21 between elements 6, 7, and 10, and realized gain at 26, 28, and 30 GHz; the central claim fails if the corrugated central elements do not show lower mutual coupling and better return loss than the uncorrugated baseline at 28 GHz. A mesh-converged simulation that explicitly models the feed geometry would be a numerical check before fabrication.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central discovery is that corrugating the aperture edge converts a marginal all-metal Vivaldi array into a well-matched phased-array element. The authors first simulate a simple all-metal Vivaldi (SAMV) 4×4 array and find that surface currents excited by a central element spill onto adjacent elements, degrading return loss and raising mutual coupling. They then add nine rectangular grooves to each aperture edge, producing the corrugated all-metal Vivaldi (CAMV), and report that the simulated surface-current distribution is less concentrated at the end of the taper; the slots act as a barrier that keeps current from exiting the antenna. The corrugated array shows lower VSWR and mutual couplings $S_{6,7}$ and $S_{6,10}$, improved gain and radiation efficiency, and realized gain patterns at 26, 28, and 30 GHz with the main beam at 0° and 30°.

Load-bearing premise

The central claim rests on the simulated full-wave model's 50-ohm port and metal conductivity being realistic, since the paper gives no physical feed implementation, no fabricated prototype, and no convergence check; if that idealized feed is wrong, the predicted improvements may not appear in a real array.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • In a 4×4 array, the four central elements (positions 6, 7, 10, and 11) keep a matched return loss around 28 GHz with the corrugation, whereas the uncorrugated version loses bandwidth there.
  • The mutual couplings $S_{6,7}$ and $S_{6,10}$ fall across 25–31 GHz, giving the phased array cleaner independent control of central-element phases during beam steering.
  • Realized-gain curves at 26, 28, and 30 GHz show the main beam can be pointed to 0° and 30°, supporting the claimed ±30° scan range.
  • Because the structure is all-metal, it avoids dielectric loss and can be produced by simple metal machining, which the paper argues makes it a practical 5G candidate.
  • Higher radiation efficiency implies more of the input power is radiated, which can translate to higher effective data rates at the same drive power in a 5G link.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The improvement is demonstrated only for the central elements of a 4×4 array; the same edge-corrugation idea could plausibly extend to dual-polarized or larger arrays, but edge-element behavior and scan impedance would need separate simulation or measurement.
  • The 'barrier' explanation implies the effect should depend on slot depth and period relative to the 28 GHz wavelength; a parametric sweep of $L_{s1}$–$L_{s9}$ and $W_s$ would map the tolerance of the claimed improvement.
  • Because no prototype is reported, the idealized 50-ohm feed is the key uncertainty; a fabricated array with a physical coaxial-to-slotline transition, measured with a vector network analyzer, would directly test whether the simulated improvements survive.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a corrugated all-metal antipodal Vivaldi antenna (CAMV) as a 4x4 phased array element for 28 GHz 5G applications, and compares it against a simple all-metal Vivaldi (SAMV) array. The authors claim that adding corrugation slots to the aperture edge reduces surface currents, lowers interelement mutual coupling, improves return loss and VSWR of the central elements, and increases gain and radiation efficiency. The antenna is designed with a 26–30 GHz operating band and beam steering from -30 to +30 degrees. The paper presents only full-wave simulation results; no prototype or measurements are reported.

Significance. If the central claims are correct, the corrugation technique is a simple, mechanically robust way to improve central-element matching in a compact 28 GHz Vivaldi phased array, which would be relevant to 5G base-station and small-cell applications. The paper provides a complete dimensional table (Table 1), the taper equation (1), and the standard phase-progression formula (2), which together allow independent reproduction of the simulated designs. The SAMV-versus-CAMV comparison, using the same array layout and element spacing, is an appropriate methodology and is not circular. However, the contribution is incremental and entirely simulation-based, with no experimental validation, no convergence study, and no quantitative gain/efficiency comparison, so the significance as it stands is moderate rather than high.

major comments (5)
  1. [§2 and §3] The paper never describes how the 50-ohm port is physically realized. The antenna is called bipolar and all-metal, which requires a balanced feed; the manuscript only states that impedance matching of the 50-ohm port has been accomplished (§2), with no information on whether the port is a lumped gap, a waveguide port, or a coaxial probe with a balun. If an idealized lumped port is used across the antipodal arms, the simulated S11 and S21 will be dominated by the port transition, not by the corrugation's effect on surface currents, so the claimed improvements may not appear in a fabricated array. This is a load-bearing omission because every performance claim is filtered through this feed model.
  2. [§3, Fig. 13] The beam-steering claims are inconsistent. The Abstract states steering from -30 to +30 degrees, while §2 states the design targets beam steering capability up to 70 degrees; Fig. 13 shows only the main beam at 0 and 30 degrees, with no result for -30 degrees and no evidence for 70-degree scanning. The sentence that "the results of this figure prove the acceptable scanning performance capability" is therefore not supported by the presented data.
  3. [§2, Fig. 4(b) and §3, Fig. 10(a)] The baseline comparison is compromised by an apparent figure mislabeling. Fig. 4(b), presented as the SAMV array return loss for elements 6 and 7, is labeled "S66 corrugated array" and "S77 corrugated array"; these labels then appear again in Fig. 10(a) for the CAMV array. If Fig. 4(b) actually contains the CAMV results, the SAMV array return loss in the 4x4 configuration is never shown and the claimed improvement cannot be verified. Even if the labels are typographical errors, the inconsistency undermines the reader's ability to trust the figure-label correspondence.
  4. [§3 (text after Fig. 12)] The claim that gain and radiation efficiency are improved is never quantified. The text asserts that the CAMV structure "has a higher gain, making it more efficient" and exhibits "lower radiation losses," but no comparison of realized gain, directivity, or radiation efficiency between the SAMV and CAMV arrays is presented. Fig. 13 shows only realized gain of the CAMV array at two scan angles; it contains no SAMV comparison. This improvement claim is therefore unsupported.
  5. [§2–§3] No mesh convergence study, solver identification, boundary-condition description, or measurement validation is reported. For a design that relies entirely on full-wave simulation, the absence of a convergence check or a description of the simulation setup prevents the reader from assessing numerical reliability. This is a load-bearing omission because the central conclusion is a comparison between two simulated variants, and numerical noise could produce or mask differences of the magnitude claimed (for example, S11 dips of 20–40 dB in Figs. 8 and 10).
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2, Fig. 5 and §3, Fig. 11] The axis labels in these figures are truncated (e.g., "S6,10 Simple Elemen" and "S6,10 Corrugated Elemen") and should be completed.
  2. [§3, Fig. 10(a)] The text says the return loss for elements 6, 7, 10, and 11 is depicted, but the figure caption and labels show only elements 6 and 7; please clarify which elements are actually plotted.
  3. [Abstract and §1] The paper is formatted with the IEICE class file and includes the journal header and DOI; the arXiv version should remove these journal-specific elements to avoid confusion about the venue of publication.
  4. [§1] The introductory paragraph says the conclusions are presented in section III, but the paper actually has four sections; this cross-reference should be corrected.
  5. [Eq. (1)] The taper equation is missing a closing parenthesis in the exponent; this is likely a typographical issue, but the formula should be typeset cleanly for reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the corrugation-vs-plain comparison is an independent simulation outcome, not a derived prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that adding edge corrugations to an all-metal Vivaldi array reduces surface currents, mutual coupling, and return loss. This is supported by comparing full-wave simulation results for two distinct geometries: the SAMV array and the CAMV array. The improvement is an outcome of those simulations, not an identity or a fitted result. Equation (1) is the standard exponential taper profile and equation (2) is the conventional phased-array phase progression; neither is used to define the performance metrics, and neither contains the conclusion. The design dimensions may have been chosen to operate near 28 GHz, but that is a design procedure, not a circular derivation, and the paper does not fit a parameter to data and then present a closely related quantity as a prediction. There are no load-bearing self-citations, no imported uniqueness theorem, and no renaming of a known result. The absence of a prototype or measurement is a validation concern for correctness, not circularity. Accordingly, the derivation chain is self-contained with respect to the comparisons it actually makes.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on simulated antenna designs whose geometric parameters (taper, corrugations, spacing) are curated to meet the 28 GHz target. No new physical entities are introduced, and the electromagnetic and array equations are standard.

free parameters (3)
  • Slot exponential taper parameters (wt, wa, Ls) = wt=0.45 mm, wa=4.75 mm, Ls=7.6 mm
    Define the aperture curve in equation (1) and are hand-chosen to achieve the 26-30 GHz impedance match at 28 GHz, not derived from first principles.
  • Corrugation slot dimensions (Ws, Ls1-Ls9) = Ws=0.4 mm; Ls1-Ls9 from 1.0 to 5.5 mm (Table 1)
    Selected manually to suppress surface currents; the paper gives no optimization or theory that determines these values, so they are free parameters fit to the target performance.
  • Element spacing d = d=6.46 mm
    Set to the element width and about 0.6 lambda at 28 GHz; chosen for array packing and grating-lobe constraints rather than derived from a formula.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Full-wave electromagnetic simulation accurately models the all-metal antenna and array
    All S-parameters, patterns, and surface current plots are taken from simulation; no measured data, convergence study, or simulator specification is provided.
  • domain assumption Exponential taper in equation (1) provides a continuous impedance transition from 50 ohm port to free space
    The paper assumes the standard Vivaldi taper design rule without validating the port model or the transition to the radiating aperture.
  • standard math Uniform phased array phase progression in equation (2) is valid for beam steering
    Equation (2) is the standard linear array phase law taken from Balanis [17]; the authors assume no mutual coupling perturbation of the element pattern.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Corrugated All-Metal Vivaldi Antenna for 5G Phased Array Applications." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AQPF6X2U

@misc{pith2026250203002,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Corrugated All-Metal Vivaldi Antenna for 5G Phased Array Applications},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AQPF6X2U}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.03002}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper, a corrugated Vivaldi phased array antenna in the 28 GHz frequency band is proposed for 5G communication applications. The presented configuration features an all-metal antipodal antenna structure with a broad bandwidth ranging from 26 to 30 GHz and beam steering capabilities from -30 to +30 degrees. The proposed antenna consists of a 4x4 array configuration, where each element has dimensions of 6.46x6.46x14.25 mm, resulting in an overall antenna structure with dimensions of 25.84x25.84x14.25 mm. The corrugation method is applied to minimize surface currents, resulting in a reduction in interelement mutual couplings. Therefore, the return loss in the array structure for central elements is decreased, and the antenna gain and radiation efficiency are improved. Moreover, the improved radiation efficiency allows for higher power transmission and reception from an antenna, resulting in potentially higher data rates and better performance.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.03002 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. General geometry of a simple all-metal Vivaldi (SAMV) antenna [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Return loss (S11) of the SAMV antenna unit element. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. The SAMV antenna array cross-sectional surface current distribution [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_6.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (a) The arrangement of elements in a 4×4 array configuration. (b) Results of return loss for elements 6 and 7. 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 -40 -35 -30 -25 -20 -15 S6,7 Simple Element S6,10 Simple Elemen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Results of mutual coupling parameters for the central elements of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_5.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Return loss of the corrugated all-metal Vivaldi (CAMV) antenna [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_8.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The CAMV antenna array cross-sectional surface current distribu [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_12.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: (a) Results of return loss for elements 6 and 7. (b) Comparison of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_10.png]
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Realized gain at 𝜙 = 90 degrees for the frequencies of 26, 28 and 30 GHz; (a) the main beam is at 0 degrees. (b) the main beam is at 30 degrees.    Δ𝜑𝑥 = − 2𝜋𝑑 𝜆 sin(𝜃) cos(𝜑) Δ𝜑𝑦 = − 2𝜋𝑑 𝜆 sin(𝜃) sin(𝜑) 𝜑(𝑛, 𝑚) = 𝑛 · Δ𝜑𝑥 + 𝑚 · Δ𝜑𝑦 (2) where Δ𝜙𝑥 , Δ𝜙𝑦 ,…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

19 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Digital beamforming-based massive mimo transceiver for 5g millimeter- wave communications,

    B. Yang, Z. Yu, J. Lan, R. Zhang, J. Zhou, and W. Hong, “Digital beamforming-based massive mimo transceiver for 5g millimeter- wave communications,” IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, vol. 66, no. 7, pp. 3403–3418, 2018

    work page 2018

  2. [2]

    A comprehensive survey on internet of things (iot) toward 5g wireless systems,

    L. Chettri and R. Bera, “A comprehensive survey on internet of things (iot) toward 5g wireless systems,” IEEE Internet of Things Journal , vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 16–32, 2019

    work page 2019

  3. [3]

    8 × 8 planar phased array antenna with high efficiency and insensitivity properties for 5g mobile base stations,

    N. Ojaroudiparchin, M. Shen, and G. F. Pedersen, “8 × 8 planar phased array antenna with high efficiency and insensitivity properties for 5g mobile base stations,” in 2016 10th European conference on antennas and propagation (EuCAP). IEEE, 2016, pp. 1–5

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    Hybrid metasurface, dielectric resonator, low-cost, wide-angle beam-scanning antenna for 5g base station application,

    Z. Wang, Y. Dong, Z. Peng, and W. Hong, “Hybrid metasurface, dielectric resonator, low-cost, wide-angle beam-scanning antenna for 5g base station application,”IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 70, no. 9, pp. 7646–7658, 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Surface-mounted ka-band vivaldi antenna array,

    H. K ¨ahk¨onen, J. Ala-Laurinaho, and V. Viikari, “Surface-mounted ka-band vivaldi antenna array,”IEEE Open Journal of Antennas and Propagation, vol. 2, pp. 126–137, 2020

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    A review of adaptive beamforming techniques for wideband smart antennas,

    M. Rivas, S. Xie, and D. Su, “A review of adaptive beamforming techniques for wideband smart antennas,” in 2010 6th International Conference on Wireless Communications Networking and Mobile Computing (WiCOM). IEEE, 2010, pp. 1–5

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    Compact tapered slot antenna array for 5g millimeter-wave massive mimo systems,

    B. Yang, Z. Yu, Y. Dong, J. Zhou, and W. Hong, “Compact tapered slot antenna array for 5g millimeter-wave massive mimo systems,” IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation , vol. 65, no. 12, pp. 6721–6727, 2017

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    Slotted antenna array with enhanced radiation characteristics for 5g 28 ghz communications,

    A. A. Ibrahim, H. Zahra, O. M. Dardeer, N. Hussain, S. M. Abbas, and M. A. Abdelghany, “Slotted antenna array with enhanced radiation characteristics for 5g 28 ghz communications,” Electronics, vol. 11, no. 17, p. 2664, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 19 references
  1. [9]

    7.2 a 28ghz 32-element phased-array transceiver ic with concurrent dual polar- ized beams and 1.4 degree beam-steering resolution for 5g communi- cation,

    B. Sadhu, Y. Tousi, J. Hallin, S. Sahl, S. Reynolds, ¨O. Renstr ¨om, K. Sj¨ogren, O. Haapalahti, N. Mazor, B. Bokingeet al., “7.2 a 28ghz 32-element phased-array transceiver ic with concurrent dual polar- ized beams and 1.4 degree beam-steering resolution for 5g communi- catio...

    2017

  2. [10]

    Reconfigurable transmitarray based on frequency selec- tive surface for 2d wide-angle beam steering,

    M. Sun, H. Xi, X. Qi, K. Xu, H. Li, Q. Lv, S. Hu, S. Chen, W. Zhao, X. Li et al., “Reconfigurable transmitarray based on frequency selec- tive surface for 2d wide-angle beam steering,” Electronics, vol. 12, no. 18, p. 3854, 2023

    2023

  3. [11]

    An ultra-wideband horizon- tally polarized omnidirectional circular connected vivaldi antenna array,

    H. Liu, Y. Liu, W. Zhang, and S. Gao, “An ultra-wideband horizon- tally polarized omnidirectional circular connected vivaldi antenna array,” IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation , vol. 65, no. 8, pp. 4351–4356, 2017

    2017

  4. [12]

    Radar cross section reduction of wideband vivaldi antenna arrays with array-level scattering cancel- lation,

    Y. Gou, Y. Chen, and S. Yang, “Radar cross section reduction of wideband vivaldi antenna arrays with array-level scattering cancel- lation,” IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation , vol. 70, no. 8, pp. 6740–6750, 2022

    2022

  5. [13]

    Dual-polarized directive ultrawide- band antenna integrated with horn and vivaldi array,

    Y. Pan, Y. Cheng, and Y. Dong, “Dual-polarized directive ultrawide- band antenna integrated with horn and vivaldi array,”IEEE Antennas and Wireless Propagation Letters, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 48–52, 2021

    2021

  6. [14]

    Dual-polarized ka- band vivaldi antenna array,

    H. K ¨ahk¨onen, J. Ala-Laurinaho, and V. Viikari, “Dual-polarized ka- band vivaldi antenna array,” IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 68, no. 4, pp. 2675–2683, 2020

    2020

  7. [15]

    A super wideband dual-polarized vivaldi antenna for 5g mmwave ap- plications,

    A. Azari, A. Skrivervik, H. Aliakbarian, and A. Sadeghzadeh, “A super wideband dual-polarized vivaldi antenna for 5g mmwave ap- plications,” Ieee Access, vol. 11, pp. 80 761–80 768, 2023

    2023

  8. [16]

    A modular dual- polarized ka-band vivaldi antenna array,

    H. K ¨ahk¨onen, J. Ala-Laurinaho, and V. Viikari, “A modular dual- polarized ka-band vivaldi antenna array,” IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 36 362–36 372, 2022

    2022

  9. [17]

    C. A. Balanis, Antenna theory: analysis and design . John wiley & sons, 2016. Mahyar Mehri Pashaki was born in Rasht, Iran, in 1995. He received the B.A.Sc. de- gree (Hons.) in electrical engineering, and the M.Sc. degree from the Department of Electrical Engineering, Sharif U...

    2016

  10. [19]

    Since June 2020, he has been an Adjunct Associate Professor with the Department of Electrical and Com- puter Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, USA

    Since May 2023 he has been Full Professor and Chair of Wireless Communications at the 6G Innovation Centre, Institute for Communication Systems, University of Surrey, Guildford, U.K. Since June 2020, he has been an Adjunct Associate Professor with the Department of Electrical ...

    2023

  11. [2022]

    He has ex- tensive hands-on experience in both passive and active RF design, including microwave filters, power amplifiers, phased arrays, and millimeter- wave systems

    His current research interests include elec- tromagnetics, microwave engineering, antenna, RF circuits, and periodic structures. He has ex- tensive hands-on experience in both passive and active RF design, including microwave filters, power amplifiers, phased arrays, and milli...

    2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.