# Student Paper Competition Finalists

103.1: Tensor Huygens Surfaces
Michael Selvanayagam University of Toronto, Canada

103.4: Extreme magneto-optics with graphene metasurfaces
Ben Z. Steinberg Tel Aviv University, Israel
Arthur Davoyan The University of Pennsylvania, United States
Nader Engheta The University of Pennsylvania, United States

117.4: Radiation Patterning Enabled by ε-Near-Zero Reconfigurable Metamaterial Lenses
Jason Soric The University of Texas at Austin, United States
Andrea Alù The University of Texas at Austin, United States

120.3: A Low-Profile, Vertically-Polarized, Compact, Ultra-Wideband Antenna with a 10:1 Bandwidth
Kasra Ghaemi University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States

129.2: Non-Contact Device and Integrated Circuit Characterization in the G-Band (140-220GHz)
Cosan Caglayan The Ohio State University ElectroScience Laboratory, United States
Georgios C. Trichopoulos The Ohio State University ElectroScience Laboratory, United States
Kubilay Sertel The Ohio State University ElectroScience Laboratory, United States

227.5: Reconfigurable Ring Slot Antenna with Polarization Diversity Using Pneumatic Control
Billy Wu University of Calgary, Canada
Michal Okoniewski University of Calgary, Canada
Chris Hayden University of Calgary, Canada

301.5: Wideband Multibeam Millimeter Wave Arrays
Nathan Jastram University of Colorado Boulder, United States
Dejan Filipović University of Colorado Boulder, United States

302.1: An $O(N)$ Direct Volume IE Solver with a Rank-Minimized ${\cal H}^2$-Representation for Large-Scale 3-D Circuit Extraction in Inhomogeneous Materials
Saad Omar Purdue University, United States
Dan Jiao Purdue University, United States

303.6: A Printed Antenna Beam Former Implemented Using Tensor Transmission-line Metamaterials
Gurkan Gok University of Michigan, United States
Anthony Grbic University of Michigan, United States

312.2: Sparse Contrast-Source Inversion using Linear-Shrinkage-Enhanced Inexact Newton Method
Abdulla Desmal King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Saudi Arabia
Hakan Bagci King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Saudi Arabia

341.1: A Balun-Free Coax-Fed Helical Antenna for Minimally Invasive Microwave Ablation
Hung Luyen University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States
Susan C. Hagness University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States

410.10: A Low-Profile Sinuous Antenna
Rohit Sammeta University of Colorado Boulder, United States
Dejan Filipović University of Colorado Boulder, United States

432.2: Enhancement of the Dipole Antenna Using a Capcitively Loaded Loop (CLL) Structure
John Hodge Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, United States
Theodore Anthony U.S. Army Research Laboratory, United States
Amir Zaghloul Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University; U.S. Army Research Lab, United States

IF442.1: Multiband Unidirectional Cloaking Based on Geometric Optics
Ran Duan Michigan Technological University, United States
Elena Semouchkina Michigan Technological University, United States

# Student Paper Competition Rules and Guidelines

## A. Written Submission

1. Only one student paper competition (SPC) submission per student is allowed.
2. For consideration in the student paper competition, the student must be the only student author and must be first author on the paper. Each other co-author must submit a signed letter indicating that his/her contribution to the paper is primarily advisory. (For example, a paper with a student author and three co-advisors would have three letters submitted from the co-advisors at the time of submission.) The letters must be in PDF format and must be uploaded via this Web site at the time of paper submission.
3. All SPC papers will be judged using a double-blind review process. In double-blind reviews, the identities of the authors are withheld from the reviewers in addition to the usual practice of having the identities of the reviewers withheld from the authors. Therefore, a student must submit two copies of the SPC paper to the Web site — one without any identifying information, including authors' names, affiliations, funding sources, etc., and one intended for publication in the Symposium proceedings that includes authors' names and affiliations, etc. Other than the identifying information, the two versions of the paper should be identical. For more information and guidelines regarding the preparation of an SPC paper, please see the following instructions.

## B. Preparation and Submission of Papers for Double Blind Review

1. The double-blind review process requires that each student competitor upload two copies of his or her paper:
1. A PDF version of the paper for double-blind review - no authors, institutions, funding sources, etc., in the text and no identifying attributes in the PDF file information (available by selecting "Properties..." in the File menu in Acrobat Reader).
2. A PDF version of the paper for inclusion for publication in the Symposium proceedings (exactly the same paper as in (a), but with authors, affiliations, funding sources, etc., included).
2. Authors should not use excessive self-citation or cite work not currently in the open literature. Work in review or on schedule to be published does not qualify as being in the open literature.
3. Authors should use care when referring to their own prior work in the submission. For example, authors should not describe their prior work with phrases like:
"Previously [3], we presented an antenna that..."
Instead, authors should refer to their work in the third person, for example:
"Previously, Chen [3] presented an antenna that..."
In this way, the full citation to Chen [3] can still be given, for example:
[3] Chen, J., "Analysis of antenna with ...
4. Authors should not leave out any references or use reference listings such as:
"[3] Reference deleted for double-blind review"
in the submission.
5. Authors should prepare their submissions (both blinded and regular versions of the paper) using IEEE PDF eXpress as required by the Paper Submission Guidelines.
6. Upon submission authors are required to go through a checklist verifying that the rules and guidelines specified in this section and in Section A have been followed. Completion of the checklist will be required in order to successfully submit the student paper into the competition. The checklist is as follows:
• I verify that none of the co-authors on this paper are students, and that the uploaded letters for all co-authors indicate their job titles or positions.
• I verify that I have removed the author listing, author affiliations, and funding acknowledgments and any other author- or institution-identifying information from the blind version of the paper.
• I verify that all references to all prior work (including my own and that of others associated with my institution) are made in the third person.
• I verify that all references cited have been in the public domain/open literature for at least two months prior to the submission of this paper.

Note that failure to meet the above guidelines for double-blind review can lead to automatic disqualification of the paper from the competition. Questions regarding the preparation of papers for double-blind review can be directed to Reyhan Baktur at spc@2014apsursi.org.

## C. Evaluation of Written Submissions

1. Each selected finalist must be registered for the Symposium and must attend and present his/her paper to the judges for award consideration.
2. A panel judges from the Society’s membership including researchers from industry, laboratories, and universities will be assembled to evaluate all qualifying SPC submissions.
3. Three independent reviews for each submission from a selected panel of reviewers who are experts in the student's field of study and who are not associated with the student in any way will be obtained. A double-blind review process will be used as described in Section A.3. At least two of the reviewers must indicate the submission is acceptable for a paper to be accepted.
4. The written submission evaluation criteria are:
1. Quality of written paper (e.g., clarity, organization, figure size, style, etc.)
2. Sufficient depth and breadth of research work
3. Innovation and impact of research work
4. Verification and/or validation of results reported in paper
5. Upon completion of all of the reviews, the competition coordinator will assemble a list of the top papers based solely on the numerical scores obtained in the reviews. Student authors of the top papers will be invited to the poster presentation phase of the contest.

## D. Evaluation of Poster Presentations

1. All posters will be presented during a poster session to be held during the conference. Presenters are required to be present at the poster during this entire time.
2. The competition coordinator will assemble several individuals from the Society's membership who will judge the oral poster presentations during SPC poster session. The competition coordinator will determine the exact composition of the judging panel before the presentation session, and will ensure that the expertise of the judging panel reflects the wide range of technical topics across the field of interest of the Society.
3. Each judge will be given a score sheet that lists the names of all presenters. After reviewing all poster presentations, the judges will score the presentations based on the following criteria:
1. Quality of presentation (e.g., clarity, organization, figure size/arrangements, style, etc.)
2. Sufficient depth and breadth of research work
3. Innovation and impact of research work
4. Verification and/or validation of results reported
4. The competition coordinator, with the support of the AP Society Student Paper Competition Committee and the judging panel, will tally the scores submitted by the judges and determine the total score for each competitor. The competitor having the highest total score will be designated the first place winner, the second highest total score will be designated the second place winner, and the third highest score will be designated the third place winner.
5. In the event of a tie for first, second or third place, the competition coordinator, the chair of the Student Paper Competition Committee and the judging panel will meet and make the tie-breaking decisions.

## E. Awards

1. With the consent of the judging panel, the competition coordinator will announce the first, second and third place winners at the Symposium's Awards Banquet.
2. A monetary award and a certificate/plaque will be given to each student paper competition winner. The monetary awards are $700 for first place,$500 for second place, and \$300 for third place.
3. All applicable taxes are the responsibility of the award recipient. All recipients will be required to complete a United States Internal Revenue Service Form W-8 or W-9 before award funds can be disbursed.