MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013428078 · doi:10.2528/pier12040208

ADAPTIVE DETECTION OF MULTIPLE POINT-LIKE TARGETS UNDER CONIC CONSTRAINTS

2012· article· en· W2013428078 on OpenAlexaff
Chengpeng Hao, Francesco Bandiera, Jun Yang, Danilo Orlando, Shefeng Yan, Chaohuan Hou

Bibliographic record

VenueElectromagnetic waves · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsConic sectionPoint (geometry)Computer scienceArtificial intelligenceMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper addresses the problem of detecting multiple point-like targets in the presence of steering vector mismatches and Gaussian disturbance with unknown covariance matrix. To this end, we first model the actual useful signal as a vector belonging to a proper cone whose axis coincides with the whitened direction of the nominal array response. Then we develop two robust adaptive detectors resorting to the two-step GLRT-based design procedure without assignment of a distinct set of secondary data. The performance assessment has been conducted by Monte Carlo simulation, also in comparison to previously proposed detectors, and confirms the effectiveness of the newly proposed ones. In the last part of the work, in order to restore the detection performance of the newly proposed detectors in the presence of a large number of range cells contaminated by useful signals, we consider two adaptive detectors which resort to the structure information of the disturbance covariance matrix, and show that the a-priori information on the covariance structure can lead to a noticeable performance improvement.

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)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations14
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueElectromagnetic wavesSame topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207