MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1597665604 · doi:10.1109/sam.2002.1190990

Robust adaptive beamforming for general-rank signal models using worst-case performance optimization

2003· article· en· W1597665604 on OpenAlexaff
Shahram Shahbazpanahi, A.B. Gershman, Zhi‐Quan Luo, Kon Max Wong

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDirection-of-Arrival Estimation Techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAdaptive beamformerRobustness (evolution)BeamformingComputer scienceCovariance matrixSignal subspaceDiagonalRank (graph theory)AlgorithmSIGNAL (programming language)Signal processingSubspace topologyControl theory (sociology)Mathematical optimizationMathematicsArtificial intelligenceDigital signal processingNoise (video)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of adaptive beamforming methods is known to degrade in the presence of even small mismatches between the actual and presumed array responses to the desired signal. We propose a new powerful approach to robust adaptive beamforming in the presence of unknown arbitrary-type mismatches of the desired signal array response. Our approach is developed for the most general case of an arbitrary dimension of the desired signal subspace and is applicable to both rank-one and higher-rank desired signal models. The proposed beamformer is based on an explicit modeling of uncertainties in the desired signal array response and data covariance matrix as well as worst-case performance optimization. A simple closed-form solution to this robust adaptive beamforming problem is obtained. This solution naturally combines two different types of diagonal loading which are applied to the sample and presumed signal covariance matrices. Our new robust beamformer has a computational complexity comparable to that of the traditional adaptive beamforming algorithms while it offers a greatly improved robustness and faster convergence rate as compared to existing robust beamformers.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.256
Threshold uncertainty score0.528

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.178 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDirection-of-Arrival Estimation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207