A Co-Channel Signal Detector Based on Phase Tracking for Pulse Doppler Radar
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Doppler processing is routinely applied to isolate targets from noise, clutter and interference in conventional pulse-Doppler radar. If a target is co-located in range and azimuth and has a similar radial velocity (co-channel) as another target (or interference), that target may not be detected. This is because only amplitude or power information is used in the detection stage, which does not provide sufficient information to discriminate co-channel signals from each other. In this paper we propose a detector which can resolve co-located targets (or target with interference) with similar Doppler frequencies. Instead of only using phase information for the coherent integration, our proposed detector tracks the phase modulation differences of the co-located, co-channel, targets. The amplitude information of the targets can also be estimated and forwarded to the tracker. One application of this method is HF radar where a target may have a Doppler frequency similar to a Bragg line - first order sea clutter. The Bragg lines are generally dominant at all ranges and exist in all directions. Conventional processing fails to discriminate when targets radar features are similar to the Bragg lines. Simulations of the proposed method show promising results that targets with Doppler frequencies near Bragg lines can be detected.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it