MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993679774 · doi:10.1117/12.779598

Passive tracking with sensors of opportunity using passive coherent location

2008· article· en· W1993679774 on OpenAlexaff
Mahes Subramaniam, Ratnasingham Tharmarasa, Mike McDonald, T. Kirubarajan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKalman filterObservabilityComputer scienceTracking (education)Radar trackerExtended Kalman filterPassive radarReal-time computingFilter (signal processing)Bearing (navigation)RadarRadar engineering detailsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceTelecommunicationsRadar imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Passive coherent location (PCL), which uses the commercial signals as illuminators of opportunity, is an emerging technology in air defense systems. The advantages of PCL are low cost, low vulnerability to electronic counter measures, early detection of stealthy targets and low-altitude detection. However, limitations of PCL include lack of control over illuminators, poor bearing accuracy, time-varying sensor parameters and limited observability. In this paper, multiple target tracking using PCL with high bearing error is considered. In this case, the challenge is to handle high nonlinearity due to high measurement error. In this paper, we implement the converted measurement Kalman filter, unscented Kalman filter and particle filter based PHD filter for PCL radar measurements and compare their performances.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207