ArticleScientific reports2026
Fast and accurate extraction of microwave filter coupling matrix via physics-informed deep learning.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Tuning microwave filters presents a significant challenge owing to their inherent complexity. An accurate determination of the coupling matrix from the target S-parameters plays a crucial role in both filter tuning and design optimization. This study introduces a physics-informed deep neural network (PIDNN) framework for extracting coupling matrices directly from the target S-parameters of microwave filters. The proposed approach integrates physical circuit knowledge into the learning model to enhance physical insight and precision. To validate its performance and robustness, the PIDNN is evaluated on fifth- and eighth-order filters and benchmarked against two alternative neural models: a convolutional neural network (CNN) representing a conventional deep learning approach, and a radial basis function neural network (RBFNN) as a representative shallow model. Comparative results demonstrate that the PIDNN achieves superior accuracy and computational efficiency in retrieving coupling matrices corresponding to the specified target S-parameter responses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.