MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1970595529 · doi:10.1109/radar.2014.7060340

Waveform optimization for random-phase radar signals with PAPR constraints

2014· article· en· W1970595529 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveformClutterComputer scienceRadarMatched filterPhase (matter)Electronic engineeringInterference (communication)SIGNAL (programming language)Radar systemsFilter (signal processing)Power (physics)Moving target indicationPulse-Doppler radarAlgorithmTelecommunicationsEngineeringRadar imagingPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transmitting waveforms that are designed in real time to best deal with the interference environment has been shown to provide significant performance benefits. Most previous works has assumed a line-of-sight propagation model. In this paper we build on previous work in waveform optimization for multiple-input, multiple-output radar systems for the case where the signal, during propagation, under goes phase perturbations. In this paper we consider waveform design with the peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR), an issue of practical importance. Furthermore, we couple the design of the waveform with an adaptive receiver and obtain, simultaneously, the weights in an adaptive adaptive matched filter. An example of a clutter and target model is provided to show how the optimal waveform design improves the detection performance of a random-phase radar compared to traditional waveforms.

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.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.955
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207