## 3 Antenna Testing and Result Analysis
### Comparison with State-of-the-Art Technology  
The proposed multiband multi-mode reconfigurable antenna is compared with the results of a recently published study targeting similar applications, as depicted in Table 1. Apart from that reported in [28], the proposed antenna offers a more-compact size. Although the antenna presented in [28] offers a smaller size it has the drawback of having a single-band operation while utilizing four PIN diodes. On the other hand, the antennas reported in [15; 22; 23] offer a multiband mode but they suffer from a narrow bandwidth and large electrical size. The antenna reported in [14] not only offers single-band reconfigurability but it also utilizes 12 PIN diodes with a large-sized radiator. Thus, it can be concluded that the proposed antenna offers the best solution, having the advantages of not being limited to a compact size and having multi-mode reconfigurability, while using two PIN diodes with a simple configuration, that increase its potential to be used in present and future compact electronic devices.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**Ref.**} & **Dimensions** & \multirow{2}{*}{**Reconfigurable Modes**} & **Bandwidth** & **No. of** \\  & **(mm \(\times\) mm)** & & **(GHz)** & **Switches** \\ \hline
[14] & 53.5 \(\times\) 53.5 & Single Band & 2.4–2.42 \(\mid\) 5.68–6 & 12 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[15]} & \multirow{3}{*}{30 \(\times\) 20} & Wideband & 3.51–8.51 & \multirow{3}{*}{3} \\  & & Single Band & 3.10–4.11 & & \\  & & Dual Band & 2.41–2.81 \(\mid\) 5.47–7.18 & & \\  & & Tri-Band & 2.03–2.27 \(\mid\) 4.61–5.35 \(\mid\) 5.87–7.22 & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[16]} & \multirow{3}{*}{16 \(\times\) 22} & Single Band & 5.15–5.27 & \multirow{3}{*}{2} \\  & & Tri-Band & 2.14–2.17 \(\mid\) 4.02–4.47 \(\mid\) 5.15–5.53 & & \\  & & & 2.08–2.11 \(\mid\) 3.13–3.2 \(\mid\) 4.49–5.2 & & \\ \hline
[21] & 24 \(\times\) 51 & Single Band & 0.85–1.3 \(\,\)* & 1 ** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[22]} & \multirow{3}{*}{34 \(\times\) 34} & Penta-Band & 1.8 \(\mid\) 3.3 \(\mid\) 4.8 \(\mid\) 5.5 \(\mid\) 5.8 \(\,\)* & \multirow{3}{*}{4} \\  & & Hexa-Band & 1.3 \(\mid\) 2.1 \(\mid\) 2.8 \(\mid\) 3.9 \(\mid\) 4.8 \(\,\)* & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Tri-Band & 2.5 \(\mid\) 3.9 \(\mid\) 4.8 \(\,\)* & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{[23]} & \multirow{3}{*}{22 \(\times\) 32} & Octa-Band & 2.34–2.82 \(\mid\) 3.84–4.53 \(\mid\) 5.61–5.985 \(\mid\) 10.46–12.84 & \multirow{3}{*}{1} \\  & & 113.84–14.50 \(\mid\) 15.69–17.37 & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Penta-Band & 3.84–4.53 \(\mid\) 5.61–5.985 \(\mid\) 7.89–8.79 \(\mid\) 13.84–14.50 & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 115.69–17.37 & & \\ \hline
[25] & 120 \(\times\) 60 & Single Band & 0.96 \(\mid\) 2.1 \(\mid\) 2.12 \(\,\)* & 2 \\ \hline
[28] & 10 \(\times\) 25 & Single Band & 0.698–0.96 \(\mid\) 1.6–2.6 \(\mid\) 3.4–3.8 \(\mid\) 5–6 \(\,\)* & 4 \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Proposed} & \multirow{3}{*}{15 \(\times\) 20} & Wideband & 3.9–7.15 & \multirow{3}{*}{2} \\  & & Dual Band & 1.78–1.84 \(\mid\) 3.91–7.23 & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & Tri-Band & 2.1– 2.19 \(\mid\) 2.54–2.65 \(\mid\) 4.2–7.2 & \\ \cline{1-1}  & & 2.55–2.72 \(\mid\) 3.5–3.85 \(\mid\) 4.99–7.15 & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* Total Frequency Range, ** Varactor diode, \({}^{*}\) bandwidth is not given.  
\end{table}
Table 1: Comparison of proposed reconfigurable antenna with antennas proposed in recent reported studies.