Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) radar utilizes orthogonal waveforms on each transmit element to achieve virtual aperture extension. Compared to a directed beam radar, MIMO radar has increased Doppler resolution due to the longer integration times required to maintain the same energy on target. However, the requirement for longer integration times can also cause target returns to be spread over multiple range-Doppler bins, which decreases probability of detection. This paper derives an analytical expression for probability of detection that explicitly accounts for range-Doppler migration. The effect of target velocity, target acceleration and integration time on range-Doppler migration is analyzed. A framework for velocity and acceleration compensation and step sizes for full and partial compensation are proposed. Single-target track completeness and track accuracy are compared for directed beam radar, MIMO radar with full compensation, MIMO radar with partial compensation, and uncompensated MIMO radar. Results indicate that compensation is required to prevent degraded probability of detection and track completeness as target velocity and acceleration increase. Full compensation mitigates the effects of range-Doppler migration but requires additional computational complexity. The use of partial compensation reduces computational complexity requirements but has diminished tracking performance due to coasting over missed measurements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".