Table 2.

The reliability of the tuned matching network, using the two optimization strategies in both examples, with multiple types of disturbing objects. Two different sets of prerequisites are considered. The percentages in bold text correspond to the settings shown in Figure 14 and Figure 15.

		${\mathit{G}}_{\mathit{T}}>-2$ $|{\mathit{S}}_{11}| <-15$		${\mathit{G}}_{\mathit{T}}>-3$ $|{\mathit{S}}_{11}| <-10$
		Opt-G	Opt-R	Opt-G	Opt-R
Example 1 $a=5$, $b=5$ 5.15 to 5.85 GHz	Laptop	43.7%	54.1%	100%	100%
	Book	85.4%	100%	100%	100%
	Smartphone, parallel	46.3%	54.8%	100%	100%
	Smartphone, perpendicular	17.7%	33.0%	99.5%	99.9%
	Hand	66.9%	81.5%	99.9%	99.9%
	Empty bottle	91.5%	99.4%	100%	99.9%
	Quarter-filled bottle	74.3%	79.3%	100%	99.9%
	Half-filled bottle	72.9%	79.1%	100%	99.9%
	Full	70%	79.5%	100%	100%
Example 2 $a=1$, $b=5$ 5.50 to 5.65 GHz	Laptop	27.2%	50.5%	79.4%	100%
	Book	56.8%	93.3%	100%	100%
	Smartphone, parallel	1.7%	5.1%	69.5%	80.3%
	Smartphone, perpendicular	0.0%	1.7%	51.1%	66.5%
	Hand	0.0%	11.3%	47.6%	71.5%
	Empty bottle	16.0%	43.0%	100%	100%
	Quarter-filled bottle	10.8%	11.6%	67.4%	71.3%
	Half-filled bottle	3.2%	9.8%	66.0%	70.5%
	Full bottle	0.5%	13.1%	71.8%	75.8%