MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979327806 · doi:10.1121/1.2942972

Accuracy enhancement of underwater target detection with time-frequency analysis techniques

2007· article· en· W1979327806 on OpenAlexaff
Abdalla Osman, Naser El‐Sheimy, Aboelmagd Nourledin, Jim Theriaul, Scott Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of CanadaUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnderwaterComputer scienceInterference (communication)AcousticsNoise (video)Signature (topology)SonarSonar signal processingUnderwater acoustic communicationSignal processingArtificial intelligencePhysicsTelecommunicationsMathematicsGeologyRadarChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Underwater target detection is mainly based on acoustic emissions generated by the target of interest (TOI) as it propels itself through the ocean, and operates non-propulsion-related onboard systems. The spectral signature of these acoustic emissions is used for identification and localization of TOI. This paper focuses on underwater target detection using passive sonobuoys. Discrete Fourier transform (DFT) is used in most sonobuoy processing systems to provide spectral analysis of the received signals. Due to the relatively high noise level and the several sources of interference that may exist underwater, the DFT may not determine the spectral signature of TOI with adequate accuracy. The low signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and the presence of strong interference sources with frequencies close to the TOI frequency jeopardize the detection accuracy, the bearing estimation performance, and target tracking capabilities. The aim of this paper is to: (1) examine the performance of both wavelet packet analysis and high resolution spectral estimation techniques, and (2) provide a comparative study between both methods. Based on underwater acoustic simulation developed in this research, results showed that the proposed methods can achieve robust target detection with low levels of SNR and interferences of nearby signatures that cannot be detected by DFT.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicUnderwater Acoustics ResearchFrench-language works237,207