MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025282371 · doi:10.1049/ip-rsn:20010383

Evaluation of a weather clutter simulation

2001· article· en· W2025282371 on OpenAlexafffund
Alan D. Thomson, E. Riseborough

Bibliographic record

VenueIEE Proceedings - Radar Sonar and Navigation · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National Defence
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsClutterRadarWeather radarComputer scienceFidelityRemote sensingSIGNAL (programming language)Set (abstract data type)MeteorologyGeologyTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The output of a high-fidelity weather clutter simulation, designed to model low-PRF X-, C-, or S-band phased array radar, is compared with measurements made by three radar systems. The first comparison demonstrates the simulation's ability to replicate real horizon search measurements in terms of various signal properties. The second comparison demonstrates the simulation's ability to generate signals that reflect the vertical dynamic and thermodynamic structure of stratiform precipitation. The third comparison demonstrates the simulation's ability to create weather clutter signals with exotic power spectrum shapes that do exist in nature. In all three cases the simulation output is found to compare well with the real radar measurements. Thus, this simulation is a very good tool for generating realistic weather clutter signals and as such provides a valuable source of data for applications requiring such signals. In addition, this simulation can be used to add controllable weather clutter to existing experimental measurements that may have been affected by weather if it had been present at the time of measurement. This allows the effects of weather clutter to be considered when analysing any experimental data set.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEE Proceedings - Radar Sonar and NavigationSame topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207