1150 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MICROWAVE THEORY AND TECHNIQUES, VOL. 65, NO.

4, APRIL 2017

Closed Form Kramers–Kronig Relations to Extract

the Refractive Index of Metamaterials
Zsolt Szabó

Abstract— Closed form expressions of the Kramers–Kronig
and of the multiply subtractive Kramers–Kronig relations are
derived to predict the real part of the refractive index from
the imaginary part, which is given in discrete frequency points.
The accuracy and the convergence rate of the closed form
expressions are investigated by calculating the refractive index
of a hypothetical double negative metamaterial with predefined
parameters. Then, a two-step procedure is presented, which
utilizes the subtractive Kramers–Kronig relation to uniquely
retrieve the effective refractive index of metamaterials even when
the Kramers–Kronig relation fails. The developed procedure is
demonstrated by extracting the effective parameters of multilayer
fishnet metamaterials.
Index Terms— Effective material parameters, Kramers–Kronig
relations, metamaterials.
I. I NTRODUCTION
D URING the last decade, a novel interdisciplinary scien-
tific area, the research of metamaterials emerged [1]–[4].
Nowadays, the research of metamaterials advanced to a level,
where commercial applications are underway.
The fundamental idea behind the metamaterial research is
that the subwavelength structuring can produce novel proper-
ties. Then, the key question is how to choose the geometry
of metamaterials to engineer the required electromagnetic
response, which is the distribution of the effective wave
impedance and refractive index. However, the calculation of
the effective parameters is challenging, because the frequen-
cies where the metamaterial operates can be close to the limit
of homogenization. To facilitate metamaterial design, several
homogenization strategies have been proposed. Field aver-
aging methods, such as extended Maxwell-Garnett theories,
are commonly applied [5]–[12]. Numerical averaging over the
unit cells of the metamaterial is utilized as well [13], [14].
The most common methods, however, are the extensions of
the Nicolson–Ross–Weir (NRW) model [15], which replaces
the far-field electromagnetic response (S-parameters) of meta-
material slabs with the electromagnetic response of a homo-
geneous slab [16]–[20]. The validity of this method has been
confirmed experimentally and it was shown that the extracted
parameters do not violate any physical constraint [21]. How-
ever, the method has limitations, which should be recognized.
Manuscript received June 2, 2016; revised August 19, 2016 and
November 17, 2016; accepted November 21, 2016. Date of publication
January 9, 2017; date of current version April 3, 2017.
The author is with the Department of Broadband Infocommunications and
Electromagnetic Theory, Budapest University of Technology and Economics,
1111 Budapest, Hungary (e-mail: szabo@evt.bme.hu).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available
online at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TMTT.2016.2633345
0018-9480 © 2017 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
First of all, metamaterials can have far-reaching near fields.
Therefore, it is not straightforward how to select the effective
thickness deff of the homogeneous slab. In [16], deff is selected
as the minimum distance at which the wave impedance
becomes independent of deff . This procedure can result in
impractically large effective thickness. Often deff is considered
equal to the physical thickness of the metamaterial. Therefore,
to obtain valid S-parameters, it is common to place the excita-
tion ports of the full wave solvers outside the near-field zone of
the metamaterial. Then, the ports are deembedded. This means
that the phase of the S-parameters is shifted with the distance
between the port and the virtual position of the homogeneous
slab. Consequently, the electromagnetic fields produced by the
homogenized slab differ from the fields of the metamaterial
not only inside the metamaterial, but in its surrounding as
well. Second, the extracted electromagnetic parameters are
often nonlocal. They can change significantly as a function
of the number of layers and angle of incidence. When many
layers of unit cells are present, the electromagnetic parameters
should converge to a bulk value. However, it is common that
the metamaterial is no longer opaque or the homogenization
limits are exceeded before convergence occurs. Therefore,
special care must be taken when the extracted parameters
are utilized. The NRW model can replace the metamaterial
only in special cases, when there are no other elements
(e.g., antennas and polarizers) in its close environment, and
the secondary reflections can be disregarded as in [22]. More
often, the coupling effects cannot be neglected. In spite of
these limitations, even the nonlocal metamaterial parameters
can be useful. They can provide good starting values for full
wave electromagnetic optimizations, which include the fine
details of the metamaterial as in [23]. Current developments
of metamaterial homogenization are usually driven to correct
these limitations, especially the nonlocality of the extracted
metamaterial parameters [9], [12], [24]–[26]. Nevertheless,
even these methods require NRW type models to approximate
the wavenumber required by the first-principles homogeniza-
tion theory.
The main difficulty of the NRW models is the calculation
of the refractive index, which involves the evaluation of a
complex logarithm. The resulting uncertainty is referred to
as branching problem and affects only the real part of the
refractive index. Several methods have been proposed to solve
this ambiguity, as summarized in [20]. The S-parameters of
two different thicknesses of the same metamaterial may allow
to obtain the branch index [27]. This procedure assumes that
the real part of the wave number is independent of thickness.
However, the refractive index and, consequently, the wavenum-
SZABÓ: CLOSED FORM KRAMERS–KRONIG RELATIONS TO EXTRACT THE REFRACTIVE INDEX
ber can change even when the thickness of the metamaterial
is increased with only one unit cell. As another possibility,
from linear system theory is known that the real part of
the frequency response at the output of a causal system
can be derived from its imaginary part [28]. Therefore, the
Kramers–Kronig relations can be applied to remove this
ambiguity [29], [30].
It is the requirement of our version of metamaterial para-
meter extraction [30] to enforce the Kramers–Kronig relation
for the refractive index. The physically valid refractive index
is determined by selecting those branches of the logarith-
mic function, which are closest to those predicted by the
Kramers–Kronig relation. The procedure also enforces the
continuity of the real part of the refractive index that is of
the wavenumber as function of frequency. Discontinuity in the
extracted real part of the refractive index may indicate that
the limit of homogenization is reached. The extracted wave
impedance and all other electromagnetic parameters must
satisfy the Kramers–Kronig relations as well. This procedure
highly relies on the accuracy by which the Kramers–Kronig
integral is evaluated. Accurate calculations require the
S-parameters over a considerably larger frequency region than
the frequencies where the effective metamaterial parameters
are extracted. This is inconvenient when measurements are
performed and also when the S-parameters are numerically
calculated. Consequently, it is essential to limit the frequency
range of the calculations and at the same time, to provide
an accurate estimate for the refractive index. Therefore, in
this paper, we propose to utilize subtractive Kramers–Kronig
relations [31], [32] to uniquely extract the real part of the
refractive index.
This paper is organized as follows. In Sections II and III,
closed form expressions of the Kramers–Kronig and of the
subtractive Kramers–Kronig relations are derived. The con-
vergence rate of the expressions is shown by calculating the
refractive index of a hypothetical metamaterial with predefined
parameters. In Section IV, a two-step procedure to extract
the refractive index of metamaterials is introduced. Then,
the multilayer fishnet metamaterial serves as an example to
present two scenarios that can be often encountered during the
homogenization of metamaterials, when the Kramers–Kronig
relation fails, however, the subtractive Kramers–Kronig rela-
tion can accurately predict the correct branch of the refractive
index.
II. C LOSED F ORM E XPRESSIONS OF THE
K RAMERS –K RONIG I NTEGRAL
The real part of the refractive index n can be expressed as
a function of the imaginary part κ with the Kramers–Kronig
relation [32], [33] as
 ∞ 
2 ω κ(ω )
n(ω) = 1 + P  dω (1)
π 0 ω 2 − ω2
where ω is the angular frequency and P denotes the principal
value of the improper integral. Note that in this paper, the
time-harmonic convention exp(−i ωt) is used. Consequently,
the complex refractive index is written as N = n + i κ, and
for passive media, the imaginary part of the refractive index
1151
is positive, κ > 0. The limits of the integral are 0 and ∞, and
therefore, the imaginary part of the refractive index should be
known for the entire frequency range.
In case of natural dielectric materials, at very high frequen-
cies, the real part of the refractive index approaches unity
from below, while the imaginary part tends to zero as the
inverse third power of the frequency [33]. At frequencies
higher than far ultraviolet, diffraction occurs (e.g., X-rays).
The refractive index loses its meaning and the Laue theory
describes the interaction of the electromagnetic waves with
the crystal lattice. At such frequencies, the material cannot be
regarded as a continuum, because the details of the crystal
structure are comparable or larger than the wavelength and
the conditions of homogenization are exceeded. From frequen-
cies that are higher than the highest far-ultraviolet frequency
for which measurements can be made, the Kramers–Kronig
relations require a suitable continuation of the involved
quantities to infinite frequency. This extrapolation allows to
extend the frequency response to build a causal time-domain
model. The same considerations can be made when the
Kramers–Kronig relation is applied for metamaterials. How-
ever, depending on the geometry, the limits of the homogeniza-
tion can scale even to microwaves and there is no constraint
that the real part of the refractive index should approach
unity.
Usually, the integral in (1) is truncated, and therefore, the
Kramers–Kronig relation can provide only an approximation
of the refractive index, which is denoted by n K K (ω). The
imaginary part of the refractive index is usually given as a set
of discrete data points on the interval [ωa , ωb ] and often the
spacing is equidistant with the frequency step ω. To avoid
the singularity of the Kramers–Kronig integral, two meshes,
the primary mesh and the secondary mesh, are introduced.
The primary mesh is associated with the imaginary part of
the refractive index, while the corresponding frequencies are
distinguished by a prime symbol and the following notation
is applied κ(ωl ) = κl . The secondary mesh is associated
with the real part of the refractive index. The frequencies of
the primary mesh and of the secondary mesh are related as
ωl = (ωl + ωl+1 )/2 = ω + ω/2 and the Kramers–Kronig
l
relation (1) can be expressed as
L−1  ω
2  l+1 ω  κ(ω  )
n K K (ω) = n h + P 2 dω (2)
π 
ωl ω − ω 2
l=0
where L is the number of frequency points, where the imagi-
nary part of the refractive index is known and n h is a constant,
which is the cumulative effect of the continuation and can
compensate for the truncation of the integral. In the following,
closed form expressions of the Kramers–Kronig expression are
deduced by approximating the imaginary part of the refractive
index between each ωl , ωl+1
 frequency points.
A. Zero-Order Approximation
In case of the zero-order approximation, the imaginary part
of the refractive index is considered constant κ(ω ) = κl
over the frequency interval [ωl , ωl+1
 ], therefore (2) can be
1152 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MICROWAVE THEORY AND TECHNIQUES, VOL. 65, NO. 4, APRIL 2017

written as while the second integral has similar form as (4). Substituting
L −1
  
 the closed form expressions of the integrals in (9) the following
2  ωl+1 ω
n K K (ω) = n h + κl dω . (3) formula can be deduced
π ωl
2
ω − ω2 L−1

l=0 2  κl+1 − κl
The integral, which appears in this expression, can be evalu- n (ω) = n h +
KK
ω+
π ω
l=0
ated and it has the following closed form  
 ω  ω + ω ω − ω   
κl ωl+1 − κl+1 ωl
x 1  l l+1 
d x = log |x 2 − a 2 |, (4) log     + ×
x 2 − a2 2 2  ω − ωl ω + ωl+1   2ω
 
 2ωl ω + ω2 
where log() denotes the natural logarithm and the bars are the 
log 1 +   . (11)
absolute value. Substituting (4) in (3) and after some algebraic  ωl 2 − ω2 
manipulations, the following expression is obtained
   Note that (11) can be converted into (7) by setting κl+1 = κl .
1 
L−1  ω 2 − ω2 
KK  l+1  The presented formulation can be conveniently implemented
n (ω) = n h + κl log   2 . (5) by precomputing the coefficients, which do not depend on ω
π  ωl − ω2 
l=0
κl+1 − κl ml
This relation is valid even for nonuniformly spaced data points. c1,l = = ,
πω π
For uniformly spaced frequencies, with the step size ω, the 
κl ωl+1 − κl+1 ωl bl
fraction can be expressed as c2,l = = ,
  2 πω π
2
ωl+1 − ω2 ωl + ω − ω2 2ω ω + ω2 c3,l = 2ωl ω + ω2 ,
2 = 2 = 1 + l 2 , (6)
ωl − ω2 ωl − ω2 ωl − ω2 c4,l = 2ωc1,l , (12)
and the refractive index can be calculated as leading to the following iterative scheme
 
L
 −1   ω + ω2  L
 −1
1  2ω 
n K K (ω) = n h + κl log 1 + l  2 . (7) n (ω) = n h +
KK
c4,l + c1,l ω×
π  ωl − ω 2 
l=0 l=0
   
This expression can be conveniently implemented and it results  ω + ω ω − ω    
 l l+1   c 3,l 
in a faster computer algorithm than (5), because the nominator log      + c 2,l log  1+   . (13)
 ω − ωl ω + ωl+1
   ωl −ω 
2 2
of the fraction does not depend on ω, therefore it can be
precomputed. The developed algorithm considers the real part When the real part of the refractive index is required on the
of the refractive index constant on the interval [ωl , ωl+1 ] primary mesh, linear interpolation can be applied, except for
and the computed values nl can be directly assigned to the the first and last frequency points. For these points, extrapola-
frequencies point ωl of the primary mesh if necessary. tion may be applied; however, the developed algorithm directly
assigns the refractive index of the first and last frequency
B. First-Order Approximation points of the secondary mesh to the primary mesh.
In the following, the convergence of the zero-order and first-
In case of the first-order approximation, the imaginary part order closed form approximations is analyzed as a function of
of the refractive index is considered to be a linear function the step size and as a function of the available bandwidth,
over the frequency interval [ωl , ωl+1 ] which is the truncation frequency range, for a hypothetical
κ(ω ) = m l ω + bl , double negative metamaterial. In the frequency region of
κl+1 − κl operation, the relative electric permittivity of several meta-
ml =  ,
ωl+1 − ωl materials can be expressed with the Drude model, which is
 often followed by the first resonance of Lorentzian shape as
κl ωl+1 − κl+1 ωl
bl =  , (8) ωp2 (s − h )ωe0
2
ωl+1 − ωl r (ω) = h − + , (14)
ω 2 + i γe ω ωe0
2 − i ωδ − ω2
e
where m l is the slope of the line, bl is the y-intercept,
κl = κ(ωl ), and κl+1 = κ(ωl+1 ). Substituting (8) in (2), the where h is the electric permittivity at high frequencies,
real part of the refractive index can be expressed as ωp is the Drude plasma frequency, γe is the collision frequency,
  s is the static electric permittivity, ωe0 is the electric resonant
L−1 
2  ωl+1 ω2 frequency, and δe is the electric damping factor. The relative
n (ω) = n h +
KK
ml 2 dω
π ω  ω − ω 2 magnetic permeability of the metamaterial has Lorentzian
l=0 l
 ω
form described by the formula
l+1 ω
+ bl  dω . (9) (μs − μh )ωm0
2
ωl ω 2 − ω2 μr (ω) = μh + , (15)
ωm0
2 − i ωδ − ω2
m
The first integral of this expression can be calculated as
   where μs is the static magnetic permeability, μh is the
x 2d x   a + x  magnetic permeability at high frequencies, ωm0 is the mag-
−1 x a   , (10)
= x − a tanh = x − log 
x 2 − a2 a 2 a−x netic resonant frequency, and δm is the magnetic damping
SZABÓ: CLOSED FORM KRAMERS–KRONIG RELATIONS TO EXTRACT THE REFRACTIVE INDEX 1153

of κ(ω ). The expression of the subtractive Kramers–Kronig

relation can be simplified by utilizing the following basis
polynomials
    2   2 
x 2 −x 12 . . . x 2 −x k−1
2 x − x k+1
2 . . . x − x 2p
βk (x) =  2    2   2 ,
x k −x 12 . . . x k2 −x k−1
2 x k − x k+1
2 . . . x k − x 2p
(17)

where p is the order of the polynomial, the points x k ∈ R are

Fig. 1. Refractive index of the hypothetical metamaterial and approximations
all different, k = 1 . . . p, and βk (x m ) = δk,m , where δk,m is the
of the real part of the refractive index calculated with the Kramers–Kronig Kronecker delta function. The real part of the refractive index
integral. The imaginary part of the refractive index is the curve marked with can be expressed with the p-order subtractive Kramers–Kronig
diamond symbols. The exact values of the real part of the refractive index are
plotted with the solid line. The Kramers–Kronig approximation of the real part
relation as
of the refractive index for n h = (μh h )1/2 are plotted with dots, while for
n h = 1 with the curve marked with squares. The curve marked with triangles n(ω) = β1 (ω)n(ω1 ) + β2 (ω)n(ω2 ) + · · · + β p (ω)n(ω p )
is the real part of the refractive index obtained when the Kramers–Kronig
integral is truncated to the frequency range of 8–16 GHz. 2 2    
+ ω − ω12 ω2 − ω22 . . . ω2 − ω2p
π
 ∞
ω κ(ω )dω
factor. The numerical values of the parameters are: εh = 2, ×P 2      , (18)
0 (ω − ω ) ω − ω1 . . . ω − ω p
2 2 2 2 2
ω p = 2π × 35 · 109 rad/s, γe = 2π × 3 · 109 rad/s, εs = 3,
ωe0 = 2π × 20 · 109 rad/s, δe = 2π × 0.6 · 109 rad/s, μh = 1.1,
μs = 2.5, ωm0 = 2π × 10 · 109 rad/s, and δm = 2π × 2.2 · 109 where ω1 , ω2 , . . . , ω p are the reference frequencies or anchor
rad/s. The complex refractive index can be calculated as points, in which the refractive index is known beforehand
 from independent simulations or measurements. The devel-
N(ω) = μr (ω)r (ω). (16) oped algorithm assumes that the anchor points belong to
For the given set of parameters, the exact values of the real the secondary mesh, therefore the singularity of (18) can
and imaginary parts of the refractive index are presented be conveniently avoided without the need of piecewise
in Fig. 1 with the solid line and with the curve marked integration.
with diamond symbols. To evaluate the Kramers–Kronig
integral, the refractive index at very high frequencies
n h is required. For the investigated metamaterial A. Zeroth-Order Approximation of the Subtractive
n h = (μh h )1/2 = 1.48 and considering L = 100 points on Kramers–Kronig Relation
the frequency interval 0 − 35 GHz, the refractive index n K K The imaginary part of the refractive index is considered
can be calculated with (13), which results in the curve marked constant, κ(ω ) = κl over the frequency interval [ωl , ωl+1
 ],
with dots. However, n h is usually not known. Therefore, it therefore the integral of (18) can be written as
is often approximated with n h = 1, which causes a shift,
see the line marked with square symbols. The accuracy  ∞ ω κ(ω )dω
of the Kramers–Kronig integral is highly affected by the  
    
available bandwidth. For example, when the frequency range 0 (ω 2 − ω2 ) ω 2 − ω12 . . . ω 2 − ω2p
is reduced to the 8–16 GHz interval, the Kramers–Kronig L
 −1  
ωl+1 ω dω
integral provides the curve marked with triangle symbols. = κl 2
      , (19)
These errors can be decreased with the closed formulas of l=0 ωl (ω − ω2 ) ω − ω12 . . . ω 2 − ω2p
2

the subtractive Kramers–Kronig relation, which are derived

in Section III. where the last integral has the following primitive
For the considered metamaterial, the zero-order and the first- function
order approximations have similar convergence rate, however, 
the first-order approximation is more accurate and especially xdx
    
applicable when the metamaterial possesses resonances with x − a1 x − a22 . . . x 2 − a 2p
2 2 2
high quality factor, that is the imaginary part changes abruptly  
1 log x 2 − ai2 
p
in a narrow frequency range. =  2    2   2 .
2 ai − a12 . . . ai2 − ai−1
i=1
2 ai − ai+1
2 . . . ai − a 2p
III. C LOSED F ORM E XPRESSIONS FOR S UBTRACTIVE (20)
K RAMERS –K RONIG R ELATION
In this section, closed form expressions for p point Substituting the primitive function (20) in (18), taking
subtractive Kramers–Kronig relation [31], [32] are derived by the limits of integration and after some algebraic manip-
employing the zero-order and the first-order approximations ulations, the subtractive Kramers–Kronig integral can be
1154 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MICROWAVE THEORY AND TECHNIQUES, VOL. 65, NO. 4, APRIL 2017

expressed as written as
 ∞
n K K (ω) ω κ(ω )dω
2     
   (ω − ω2 ) ω 2 − ω12 . . . ω 2 − ω2p
L−1
1   ω 2 − ω2  0
 
 l+1  L −1 
= κl log   2   ωl+1 ω 2 dω
π  ωl − ω2  = ml     
l=0  
⎡   ⎤ l=0 ωl (ω 2 − ω2 ) ω 2 − ω12 . . . ω 2 − ω2p
L
 −1  ω 2 − ω2   ω 
1  ⎦ ω dω
+ β1 (ω) ⎣n(ω1 ) − κl log  l+1 1
 + bl
l+1
      .
π  ωl 2 − ω12  
l=0 ωl (ω 2 − ω2 ) ω 2 − ω12 . . . ω 2 − ω2p
⎡   ⎤
L
 −1  ω 2 − ω2  (25)
1  2 ⎦
+ β2 (ω) ⎣n(ω2 ) − κl log  l+1  + ···
π  ωl 2 − ω22  The first integral can be evaluated as
l=0
⎡   ⎤ 
L −1  ω 2 − ω2  x 2d x
1   l+1 p ⎦     
+ β p (ω) ⎣n(ω p ) − κl log   2  . (21) x 2 − a12 x 2 − a22 . . . x 2 − a 2p
π  ωl − ω2p  
l=0  p
ai −1
=     2   2 
The computational load of (21) can be significantly reduced 2 ai2 − a12 . . . ai2 − ai−1
2 ai − ai+1
2 . . . ai − a 2p
i=1
with barycentric formulation [34] and by precomputing the  
coefficients, which do not depend on ω. For uniformly spaced  ai + x 
× log   , (26)
frequency points of the primary mesh, the first sum can be ai − x 
transformed in a similar manner as in (13). By defining the
weights and introducing the coefficients while the second integral is similar to (20). Substituting the
antiderivatives (20) and (26) in (25), taking the limits of

p
 2 −1 integration and after some algebra, the following closed form
wi = ωi − ωk2 , (22) expression can be obtained
k=1
k =i
  n K K (ω)
 ⎡  
2ωl ω + ω2   ω + ω ω − ω  
L
 −1
 L−1
gi = n(ωi ) −
1
κl log 1 + , (23) 1⎣   l l+1 
π  
ωl 2 − ωi2  = ω m l log    
l=0 π  ω − ωl ω + ωl+1  
l=0
  ⎤
where ωi is the i th anchor point on the secondary mesh and L −1  ω 2 − ω2 
  ⎦
i = 1 . . . p, and the following closed form expression can be + bl log  l+1  + β1 (ω)
obtained  ωl 2 − ω2 
l=0
  p ⎧ ⎡  
 ω1 + ω ω1 − ω  
wi
L−1
1   c3,l  i=0 ω2 −ω2 gi ⎨ 1⎣ 
L−1
  l+1 l 
n (ω) =
KK
κl log 1+  2 +  p wi
i
. × n(ω1 ) + ω1 m l log   
 
 
π  ωl − ω2  ⎩ π  ω1 − ωl+1 ω1 + ω
l=0 i=0 2 2 ω −ωi l=0 l
(24)   ⎤ ⎫
L
 −1  ω 2 − ω2  ⎬
 1 ⎦
− bl log  l+1 
The singularity of this expression at anchor points can  ωl 2 − ω12  ⎭
l=0
be easily avoided by setting n K K (ωi ) = n(ωi ) when
+ · · · + β p (ω)
|ω − ωi | < , where  is a small predefined positive number. ⎧ ⎡  
The advantage of this representation is that the computation ⎨ L
 −1  ω p + ω ω p − ω  
1  
of (24) requires O(n) operations only, and the need of log() × n(ω p ) + ⎣ω p m l log   l+1

 l

 
⎩ π  ω p − ωl+1 ω p + ωl
function evaluations is minimized. Comparing the deduced l=0
  ⎤⎫
closed form expression of the Kramers–Kronig integral (7) L−1  ω 2 − ω2  ⎬

 l+1 p ⎦
with the closed form expression of the subtractive Kramers– − bl log   2  . (27)
 ωl − ω2p  ⎭
Kronig relation (24), it can be observed that instead of n h l=0
stands the second term with barycentric sum. However, this
This expression can be converted into the zero-order approx-
term depends on ω and it is not simply an approximation of n h ,
imation (21) by setting κl+1 = κl ; consequently, when the
but increases the convergence rate of the deduced subtractive
slope of the line is m l = 0 and the y-intercept is bl = κl .
Kramers–Kronig relation.
Identifying the corresponding terms of the zero order and
first-order approximations, it can be observed that the
B. First-Order Approximation of the Subtractive higher computational load of the first-order approximation is
Kramers–Kronig Relation primarily the consequence of the additional log() function
The imaginary part of the refractive index κ(ω ) is con- evaluations. However, the computational load of (27) can be
sidered a linear function
 in form of (8) over the frequency significantly reduced with the barycentric formulation and by
interval ωl , ωl+1
 . Therefore, the integral of (18) can be precomputing the coefficients, which do not depend on ω.
SZABÓ: CLOSED FORM KRAMERS–KRONIG RELATIONS TO EXTRACT THE REFRACTIVE INDEX 1155

Introducing the coefficient

⎡  
1⎣ 
L−1  ωi + ω ωi − ω  
 l+1 l 
f i = n(ωi ) + ωi m l log   
  −
 
π  ωi − ωl+1 ωi + ωl
l=0
  ⎤
L
 −1  ω 2 − ω2 
 i ⎦
− bl log  l+1  , (28)
 ωl 2 − ωi2 
l=0

where ωi is the i th anchor point on the secondary mesh

and i = 1 . . . p, and the following expression, which
is suitable for effective computer implementation, can be
obtained
 
L
 −1  ω + ω ω − ω  
 l l+1 
KK
n (ω) = c1,l ω log    
 ω − ωl ω + ωl+1
 
l=0
 
 c3,l 

+ c2,l log 1 +  2 
 ωl − ω2 
p wi
i=0 ω2 −ω2 f i
+ p wi
i
. (29)
i=0 ω2 −ω2
i
Comparing the closed form expression (13) deduced for the
Kramers–Kronig relation and (29) obtained for the subtractive
Kramers–Kronig relation, it can be observed that the terms of
the sums containing c1,l and c2,l coincide and both relations
reduce to the corresponding zero-order formulas by setting
κl+1 = κl . Therefore, the core of the developed computer
implementation can be similar and leads to a unified algorithm,
which handles as special cases the zero- and the second-order
approximations of the Kramers–Kronig and of the subtractive
Kramers–Kronig relation and it can be extended to higher
degree approximations as well.
The convergence of the first-order subtractive
Kramers–Kronig relation (29) in function of the number
of anchor points L is investigated for the double negative
metamaterial described in Section II-B (see Fig. 1). The
purpose is to determine the real part of refractive index
from the imaginary part in the double negative region, while
the available frequency range is truncated to the 6–20 GHz
interval. The results are presented in Fig. 2, where the
imaginary part of the refractive index is the curve marked
with diamond symbols. The anchor points are shown with
circle markers. The real part of the refractive index calculated
with the first-order subtractive Kramers–Kronig relation is the
curve marked with dots. For reference, the exact values of
the real part of the refractive index are plotted with solid line.
In Fig. 2(a), the refractive index is known in a single point,
and there are two anchor points in Fig. 2(b), three anchor
points in Fig. 2(c) and four anchor points in Fig. 2(d). The
figures show the convergence of the real part of the refractive
index to the exact values calculated with (16). Codes written
in MATLAB,1 which implement the developed expressions
are published online.2
1 [Online]. Available: www.mathworks.com/products/matlab/
2 [Online]. Available: https://sourceforge.net/projects/closed-form-kk/
Fig. 2. Convergence of the subtractive Kramers–Kronig integral with the first-
order approximation of κ(ω) as a function of the number of anchor points L.
(a) Refractive index is known in a single point. (b) Two anchor points.
(c) Three anchor points. (d) Four anchor points.
IV. E XTRACTION OF THE R EFRACTIVE I NDEX OF
M ETAMATERIALS W ITH THE S UBTRACTIVE
K RAMERS –K RONIG R ELATION
For a plane wave with normal incidence on the homo-
geneous slab, the normalized wave impedance Z eff and the
complex refractive index Neff are related to the S-parameters
as [17], [20], [30]

(1 + S11 )2 − S21
2
Z eff = ± , (30)
(1 − S11 ) − S21
2 2
 ! "#
1 S21
Neff = Im log + 2mπ
k0 deff 1 − S11 R01
! "#$
S21
− i Re log = n eff + i κeff ,
1 − S11 R01
(31)
where k0 is the free space wave number of the plane wave,
m is an integer denoting the branch index of the complex
log() function, Re() is the real part, Im() is the imaginary
part, and R01 = (Z eff − 1)/(Z eff + 1). The imaginary part
of the refractive index κeff is not affected by the branches of
the logarithmic function, and therefore, it can be calculated
without ambiguity. Then, the Kramers–Kronig relation can be
applied to estimate the real part of the refractive index from
the imaginary part. The real part of the refractive index n eff
at a given frequency can be uniquely determined by selecting
that branch of the logarithmic function, which is closest to
the value predicted by the Kramers–Kronig relation [30].
In practice, however, the precision by which the refractive
index can be determined is strongly affected by the accuracy
of the Kramers–Kronig integral and by the accuracy of the
S-parameters. The accuracy of the Kramers–Kronig relation
is affected by the available bandwidth, but often, the phase
1156 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MICROWAVE THEORY AND TECHNIQUES, VOL. 65, NO. 4, APRIL 2017
Fig. 3. S-parameters (a) magnitude and (b) phase of the multilayer fishnet
metamaterial simulated using CST. Inset of (a): geometry of the fishnet is
shown from a front view. Inset of (b): unit cell utilized in the simulations.
of the S-parameters is not accurate enough. Inspecting the
continuity of the extracted refractive index can provide a read-
ily accomplished validity testing of the parameter extraction
procedure [30]. When discontinuity occurs, then another step,
which utilizes the subtractive Kramers–Kronig relation with
anchor points properly selected from the first estimate of the
refractive index, can be inserted in the extraction procedure.
A variety of geometries has been proposed for metamaterial
unit cell [2]. The fishnet type metamaterials [35] are often
favored, because the geometry can be scaled down to provide
negative refractive index even at visible frequencies [36]. The
homogenization of the fishnet has been widely discussed in
the literature [3], [22], [37], [38]. Therefore, this metamaterial
can be utilized to illustrate two scenarios, which can occur
during the extraction of the refractive index of metamaterials.
First, the refractive index is discontinuous due to the limited
frequency range, consequently by the inaccuracy of the trun-
cated Kramers–Kronig integral. Second, the discontinuity of
the refractive index is the consequence of the inaccuracy of the
S-parameters obtained from electromagnetic field simulation.
Consider a strongly coupled fishnet metamaterial made
of twelve metallic layers separated with dielectric and per-
forated with rectangular openings arranged in square lat-
tice. The metallic layers are made of copper with thickness
of 38 μm. The dielectric layers are made of 0.76-mm-thick
ISOLA IS680-345,3 with dielectric constant r = 3.45 and
loss tan δ = 0.0035 at 10 GHz. The lattice constant of the
rectangular unit cell is ax = a y = 14 mm and the size of the
opening is wx = w y = 7 mm. The geometry from a front
view is presented in Fig. 3(a) (inset). Fig. 3(b) (inset) shows
the unit cell utilized in the simulations. This metamaterial is
3 [Online]. Available: www.isola-group.com/products/is680-345/
Fig. 4. Normalized wave impedance of the multilayer fishnet metamaterial
is extracted from the S-parameters of the frequency domain simulation.
Solid line: real part. Curve with diamonds: imaginary part. It is verified that the
extracted wave impedance satisfies the Kramers–Kronig relation by calculating
the real part from its imaginary part, see the curve plotted with dots.
operating at microwave frequencies, for a plane wave incident
perpendicular to the surface of the metamaterial and polarized
along the x-direction.
The S-parameters of the fishnet metamaterial are calculated
with the commercial field solver CST Microwave Studio.4
The simulations are performed for one unit cell of the fishnet
metamaterial with the frequency domain solver by setting unit
cell boundary conditions and tetrahedral mesh. The predefined
Floquet ports induce the plane waves and at the same time,
absorb the outgoing radiation. The ports are deembedded to the
surface of the metamaterial. Therefore, the effective thickness
of the metamaterial is deff = 12 × 0.038 + 11 × 0.76 =
8.816 mm. The magnitude of the S-parameters is shown in
Fig. 3(a) and the phase in Fig. 3(b). Note that the phase
of S21 has several jumps grouped in two frequency bands
around 10 and 15 GHz, which may indicate that the fishnet
metamaterial is not optically thin at these wavelengths and
more than one branch can contribute to the refractive index.
The extracted normalized wave impedance is shown in
Fig. 4, where the real part is plotted with solid line and
the imaginary part is the curve marked with diamonds.
To verify that the extracted wave impedance satisfies the
Kramers–Kronig relations, the real part is calculated with a
similar relation as (1) from the imaginary part, by setting
Z h = 0.096. The results are shown in Fig. 4 with dots.
A very good agreement can be observed between the real
part of the normalized wave impedance directly extracted
with the homogenization procedure and that obtained from
the Kramers–Kronig relation. The extracted refractive index
of the multilayer fishnet metamaterial is shown in Fig. 5(a).
The curve marked with diamonds is the imaginary part of
the refractive index. The refractive index approximated with
the first-order Kramers–Kronig relation (13) is plotted with
dots. The real part of the extracted refractive index is the
curve with solid line. For reference, several possible branches
of the logarithmic function (the dashed curves) are plotted
as well. The calculations reveal that the refractive index
is discontinuous at f = 16.98 GHz, which is marked in
Fig. 5(a) with a circle. The refractive index just before the
discontinuity is n eff = 0.637, therefore the guided wavelength
4 [Online]. Available: www.cst.com
SZABÓ: CLOSED FORM KRAMERS–KRONIG RELATIONS TO EXTRACT THE REFRACTIVE INDEX
Fig. 5. (a) Extraction of the real part of the refractive index from the
S-parameters of the frequency domain simulation. The imaginary part of
the refractive index is marked with diamonds. The curve marked with dots
is the refractive index calculated with the Kramers–Kronig relation. The
dashed curves are possible branches of the logarithmic function. The real
part of the refractive index is plotted with solid line and it has a discontinuity
in the circled frequency region. (b) Branch number. In the region marked with
gray the branch number is incorrect.
is λg = c0 /(n eff f ) = 27.73 mm, which is much larger than
the effective thickness of the metamaterial λg /deff ≈ 3. This
is an indication that the discontinuity is a numerical error due
to the truncation of the Kramers–Kronig integral and can be
removed by increasing the frequency range of the simulation.
The branch number m is shown in Fig. 5(b) and the region
marked with gray represents the frequencies, where the branch
number is incorrect.
The Kramers–Kronig integral has slow convergence
rate [32]. Therefore, it is inconvenient to increase the fre-
quency range of the simulation, because for accurate calcu-
lations, a new finer mesh is required. Resonances at higher
frequencies may be covered, which can also increase the
simulation time. Instead, the subtractive Kramers–Kronig rela-
tion (29), which has a higher convergence rate [32], can be
employed to obtain a better approximation of the refractive
index [see Fig. 6(a) (curve marked with dots)]. As it can be
observed, there is a very good overlap of the refractive index
obtained with the subtractive Kramers–Kronig relation and
those branches that contribute to the real part of the refractive
index. The two anchor points are selected at frequencies
f 1 = 6 GHz and f 2 = 13 GHz and the corresponding values
of the refractive index are n 1 = 0.0012 and n 2 = 0.5254.
The two cross markers of Fig. 6(a) indicate the position of the
anchor points. Note that the refractive indices at the anchor
points are the exact values from (31), calculated in the previous
step of the extraction procedure, where the branch m is
selected with the Kramers–Kronig relation (13). The position
of the anchor points is not crucial, and they are selected at
frequencies, where the separation of the branches is significant,
as another possibility can be to position one anchor point just
before the discontinuity. In [31], it is proposed to distribute the
anchor points according to a Chebychev polynomial, however,
in our case, it is appropriate to select the anchor points at
1157
Fig. 6. (a) Effective refractive index (solid line) of the 12-layer thick
fishnet metamaterial extracted with the subtractive Kramers–Kronig rela-
tion. For reference, the imaginary part of the refractive index (marked
with diamonds), the refractive index calculated with the subtractive
Kramers–Kronig relation (dots), and several possible branches of the loga-
rithmic function (dashed curves) are plotted as well. The two cross markers
indicate the position of the anchor points. (b) Branch number, which is correct
over the entire frequency range.
frequencies, where the metamaterial is thin compared with
the wavelength, which is reflected in large separation between
the branches. The branch number, which is correct over the
entire frequency range, is plotted in Fig. 6(b). The refractive
index has no discontinuities and corresponds to that one, which
can obtain with the increase of the frequency range of the
simulation.
In the following, consider the same fishnet metamaterial, but
the S-parameters are calculated with the time-domain solver
of CST Microwave Studio. The simulation domain is closed
with PEC boundary condition in the x-direction, PMC in the
y-direction, and waveguide ports in the z-direction, which are
excited with the fundamental mode to mimic a plane wave
propagating perpendicular to the surface of the fishnet and
polarized in the x-direction. The ports are deembedded to
the surface of the metamaterial. The simulation domain can
be further reduced to one quarter with symmetry conditions
(PEC in x-direction and PMC in y-direction). The computa-
tional space is divided in rectangular cells and the simulation
is stopped, when the total energy drops below −60 dB. These
boundary conditions and, therefore, the simulation setup are
valid only at frequencies below the diffraction limit. Compar-
ing the S-parameters of this simulation with the S-parameters
of the frequency domain simulation with unit cell boundary
conditions can provide information of the diffraction limit,
therefore can assist to set upper limit for the homogenization
of metamaterials. The effective refractive index extracted from
the S-parameters of the time-domain simulation is shown
in Fig. 7. The results are similar to those obtained from
the frequency domain simulation except the circled frequency
region of 15–16 GHz, where the refractive index has two
discontinuities. This frequency region is magnified in Fig. 7(b),
which reveals that it is not possible to connect the predicted
branches at the ends of this interval (15 and 16 GHz) in such
1158 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON MICROWAVE THEORY AND TECHNIQUES, VOL. 65, NO. 4, APRIL 2017

Fig. 7. (a) Effective refractive index extracted from time-domain simulation

of the S-parameters. The simulation results are similar to the frequency
domain results except the 15–16 GHz region, where the refractive index has
two discontinuities. (b) Magnified frequency region. Fig. 8. Comparison between (a) magnitude and (b) phase of the S-parameters
obtained from time-domain and frequency domain simulations. The phases
of S21 significantly differ in the frequency region around 15.5 GHz.
a way, to obtain continuous refractive index. The S-parameters
obtained from time-domain and frequency domain simulations
are compared in Fig. 8. The magnitudes of the S-parameters
are similar [see Fig. 8(a)], except a redshift of the time-domain
data, which is a dispersion error and can be corrected by
increasing the mesh size. The phases of S11 obtained from time
and frequency domain simulations agree as well, however,
the phases of S21 differ in the frequency region, where the
discontinuities of the refractive index occur [see Fig. 8(b)].
The S-parameters of the time-domain solver are calculated
from the time signals recorded at the ports with fast Fourier
transform (FFT). The FFT is dependent on the time step and
length of the recorded time signal, and usually fails to extract
the correct phase when the magnitude is close to zero. Fig. 9. Effective refractive index calculated from frequency domain data,
In such cases, auxiliary simulations can be run in the frequency when the simulation is truncated to the frequency region of 14.5–16.5 GHz.
The two anchor points (marked with cross) are selected based on the branch
domain for the interval, where the S-parameters need to be number obtained from the time-domain simulation.
improved. Due to the limited frequency range, the execution
time of the frequency domain solver is not demanding. [see the dotted curves of Figs. 7(b) and 9], it can be
The effective refractive index of the multilayer fishnet observed that they correspond even in the frequency region
calculated with the S-parameters obtained from the frequency of 15–16 GHz region, which indicates the robustness of the
domain simulation, when the frequency range is truncated to procedure.
the interval of 14.5–16.5 GHz, is presented in Fig. 9. As it
can be observed, the refractive index is uniquely identified V. C ONCLUSION
with the subtractive Kramers–Kronig relation, which utilizes Closed form expressions of the Kramers–Kronig and of
two anchor points at f 1 = 15 GHz and f 2 = 16 GHz. Due the multiply subtractive Kramers–Kronig relations have been
to the redshift of the time-domain data, it is more appropriate derived by approximating the imaginary part of the refractive
to select the branch numbers at the anchor points, this case index with constant and linear approximations between two
m 1 = 1 and m 2 = 0. Then, the refractive index at the anchor consecutive frequency points. Higher-order approximations
points can be calculated from (31) with the S-parameters can be straightforwardly derived by applying polynomial divi-
obtained from the frequency domain simulation, resulting sion. However, high degree polynomials can lead to oscil-
in n 1 = 1.592 and n 2 = 0.217. The predicted branches lations between data points, and therefore, the utilization of
lead to continuous refractive index. Comparing the refractive spline interpolation may be preferred, because the interpolation
indices provided by the subtractive Kramers–Kronig rela- error can be small even with low degree spline polynomials.
tion for the time-domain and frequency domain calculations The derived expressions require only the evaluation of basic
SZABÓ: CLOSED FORM KRAMERS–KRONIG RELATIONS TO EXTRACT THE REFRACTIVE INDEX
arithmetic operations and logarithms. Therefore, the models
are fast enough to be advantageously included in engineering
software. The expressions are general, and they can be applied
not only to material parameter extraction but for other areas
as well (e.g., signal integrity), which involves any complex
function that is analytical in the upper half-plane or signal
spectrum generated by systems with causal impulse response.
The subtractive Kramers–Kronig relation can successfully
assist to retrieve the refractive index of metamaterials even
when the Kramers–Kronig relation fails. For such scenarios,
a two-step procedure to extract the real part of the refractive
index has been developed. The multilayer fishnet metamaterial
serves as an example, and the correct refractive index has been
retrieved even when the frequency range of the simulations is
insufficient or the S-parameters are not accurate enough.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author is grateful to Cs. Vulkán, Nokia Bell Labs
Research, Budapest, Hungary, for his support and useful
technical discussions.
R EFERENCES
[1] R. Marqués, F. Martín, and M. Sorolla, Metamaterials With Negative
Parameters. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2008.
[2] L. Solymar and E. Shamonina, Waves in Metamaterials. London, U.K.:
Oxford Univ. Press, 2009.
[3] W. Cai and V. Shalaev, Optical Metamaterials. New York, NY, USA:
Springer-Verlag, 2010.
[4] I. V. Shadrivov, M. Lapine, and Y. S. Kivshar, Eds., Nonlinear, Tunable
Active Metamaterials. New York, NY, USA: Springer, 2015.
[5] V. A. Markel, “Introduction to the Maxwell Garnett approximation:
Tutorial,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. A, Opt. Image Sci., vol. 33, no. 7, pp. 1244–
1256, Jul. 2016.
[6] P. A. Belov and C. R. Simovski, “Homogenization of electromagnetic
crystals formed by uniaxial resonant scatterers,” Phys. Rev. E, Stat.
Phys. Plasmas Fluids Relat. Interdiscip. Top., vol. 72, no. 2, p. 026615,
Aug. 2005.
[7] A. D. Scher and E. F. Kuester, “Extracting the bulk effective parameters
of a metamaterial via the scattering from a single planar array of
particles,” Metamaterials, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 44–55, Mar. 2009.
[8] D. Morits and C. Simovski, “Electromagnetic characterization of planar
and bulk metamaterials: A theoretical study,” Phys. Rev. B, Condens.
Matter, vol. 82, no. 16, p. 165114, Oct. 2010.
[9] I. Tsukerman, “Nonlocal homogenization of metamaterials by dual
interpolation of fields,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. B, Opt. Phys., vol. 28, no. 12,
pp. 2956–2965, Dec. 2011.
[10] A. Alù, “First-principles homogenization theory for periodic metamateri-
als,” Phys. Rev. B, Condens. Matter, vol. 84, no. 7, p. 075153, Aug. 2011.
[11] Zs. Szabó and J. Füzi, “Equivalence of magnetic metamaterials and
composites in the view of effective medium theories,” IEEE Trans.
Magn., vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 1–4, Apr. 2014.
[12] T. D. Karamanos, A. I. Dimitriadis, and N. V. Kantartzis, “Robust
technique for the polarisability matrix retrieval of bianisotropic scatterers
via their reflection and transmission coefficients,” IET Microw., Antennas
Propag., vol. 8, no. 15, pp. 1398–1407, 2014.
[13] D. R. Smith and J. B. Pendry, “Homogenization of metamaterials by field
averaging,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. B, Opt. Phys., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 391–403,
Mar. 2006.
[14] A. K. Amert, V. V. Gozhenko, and K. W. Whites, “Calculation of
effective material parameters by field averaging over lattices with non-
negligible unit cell size,” Appl. Phys. A, Solids Surf., vol. 109, no. 4,
pp. 1007–1013, Dec. 2012.
[15] A. M. Nicolson and G. F. Ross, “Measurement of the intrinsic properties
of materials by time-domain techniques,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas.,
vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 377–382, Nov. 1970.
[16] X. Chen, T. M. Grzegorczyk, B.-I. Wu, J. Pacheco, Jr., and
J. A. Kong, “Robust method to retrieve the constitutive effec-
tive parameters of metamaterials,” Phys. Rev. E, Stat. Phys. Plas-
mas Fluids Relat. Interdiscip. Top., vol. 70, no. 1, p. 016608,
Jul. 2004.
1159
[17] D. R. Smith, D. C. Vier, T. Koschny, and C. M. Soukoulis, “Electro-
magnetic parameter retrieval from inhomogeneous metamaterials,” Phys.
Rev. E, Stat. Phys. Plasmas Fluids Relat. Interdiscip. Top., vol. 71, no. 3,
p. 036617, Mar. 2005.
[18] G. Lubkowski, R. Schuhmann, and T. Weiland, “Extraction of effective
metamaterial parameters by parameter fitting of dispersive models,”
Microw. Opt. Tech. Lett., vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 285–288, Feb. 2007.
[19] Z. Li, K. Aydin, and E. Ozbay, “Determination of the effective con-
stitutive parameters of bianisotropic metamaterials from reflection and
transmission coefficients,” Phys. Rev. E, Stat. Phys. Plasmas Fluids
Relat. Interdiscip. Top., vol. 79, no. 2, p. 026610, Feb. 2009.
[20] S. Arslanagić et al., “A review of the scattering-parameter extraction
method with clarification of ambiguity issues in relation to metama-
terial homogenization,” IEEE Antennas Propag. Mag., vol. 55, no. 2,
pp. 91–106, Apr. 2013.
[21] T. Koschny, P. Markoš, D. R. Smith, and C. M. Soukoulis, “Resonant
and antiresonant frequency dependence of the effective para-
meters of metamaterials,” Phys. Rev. E, Stat. Phys. Plasmas
Fluids Relat. Interdiscip. Top., vol. 68, no. 6, p. 065602,
Dec. 2003.
[22] A. Kalvach and Zs. Szabó, “Calculation of the image of extended objects
placed behind metamaterial slabs,” Prog. Electromagn. Res. M, vol. 47,
pp. 111–120, Mar. 2016.
[23] D. Li, Zs. Szabó, X. Qing, E.-P. Li, and Z. N. Chen, “A high gain
antenna with an optimized metamaterial inspired superstrate,” IEEE
Trans. Antennas Propag., vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 6018–6023, Dec. 2012.
[24] A. Alù, A. D. Yaghjian, R. A. Shore, and M. G. Silveirinha, “Causality
relations in the homogenization of metamaterials,” Phys. Rev. B, Con-
dens. Matter, vol. 84, no. 5, p. 054305, Aug. 2011.
[25] X.-X. Liu and A. Alù, “Generalized retrieval method for metamaterial
constitutive parameters based on a physically driven homogenization
approach,” Phys. Rev. B, Condens. Matter, vol. 87, no. 23, p. 235136,
Jun. 2013.
[26] T. D. Karamanos, S. D. Assimonis, A. I. Dimitriadis, and
N. V. Kantartzis, “Effective parameter extraction of 3D metamaterial
arrays via first-principles homogenization theory,” Photon. Nanostruct.-
Fund. Appl., vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 291–297, Aug. 2014.
[27] M. Rodriguez-Vidal and E. Martin, “Contribution to numerical methods
for calculation of complex dielectric permittivities,” Electron. Lett.,
vol. 6, no. 16, p. 510, Aug. 1970.
[28] S. H. Hall and H. L. Heck, Advanced Signal Integrity for High-Speed
Digital Designs. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2009.
[29] V. V. Varadan and R. Ro, “Unique retrieval of complex permittivity
and permeability of dispersive materials from reflection and transmitted
fields by enforcing causality,” IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Techn.,
vol. 55, no. 10, pp. 2224–2230, Oct. 2007.
[30] Zs. Szabó, G.-H. Park, R. Hedge, and E.-P. Li, “A unique extraction
of metamaterial parameters based on Kramers–Kronig relationship,”
IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Techn., vol. 58, no. 10, pp. 2646–2653,
Oct. 2010.
[31] K. F. Palmer, M. Z. Williams, and B. A. Budde, “Multiply subtractive
Kramers–Kronig analysis of optical data,” Appl. Opt., vol. 37, no. 13,
pp. 2660–2673, May 1998.
[32] V. Lucarini, J. J. Saarinen, K. E. Peiponen, and E. M. Vartiainen,
Kramers–Kronig Relations in Optical Materials Research.
Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag, 2005.
[33] C. F. Bohren and D. R. Huffman, Absorption and Scattering of Light
by Small Particles. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 1998.
[34] L. Geröcs and Ö. Vancsó, Matematika. Budapest, Hungary:
Akadémiai Kiadó, 2010.
[35] G. Dolling, C. Enkrich, M. Wegener, C. M. Soukoulis, and S. Linden,
“Low-loss negative-index metamaterial at telecommunication wave-
lengths,” Opt. Lett., vol. 31, no. 12, pp. 1800–1802, Jun. 2006.
[36] G. Dolling, M. Wegener, C. M. Soukoulis, and S. Linden, “Negative-
index metamaterial at 780 nm wavelength,” Opt. Lett., vol. 32, no. 1,
pp. 53–55, Jan. 2007.
[37] N.-H. Shen, G. Kenanakis, M. Kafesaki, N. Katsarakis, E. N. Economou,
and C. M. Soukoulis, “Parametric investigation and analysis of fishnet
metamaterials in the microwave regime,” J. Opt. Soc. Amer. B, Condens.
Matter, vol. 26, no. 12, pp. B61–B67, Dec. 2009.
[38] J. Yang, C. Sauvan, H. T. Liu, and P. Lalanne, “Theory of fishnet
negative-index optical metamaterials,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 107, no. 4,
p. 043903, Jul. 2011.
Zsolt Szabó, photograph and biography not available at the time of
publication.