MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060702310 · doi:10.1109/radar.2010.5494383

Cognitive tracking radar

2010· article· en· W2060702310 on OpenAlexaff
S. Haykin, Amin Zia, Ienkaran Arasaratnam, Yanbo Xue

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveformComputer scienceRadarRadar trackerTransmitterTracking (education)Low probability of intercept radarRadar engineering detailsFire-control radarReal-time computingDynamic programmingTracking errorSelection (genetic algorithm)AlgorithmArtificial intelligenceRadar imagingTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the first time ever, this paper presents the design and implementation of a next-generation of tracking radar systems: the cognitive tracking radar (CTR). At the heart of the CTR, we have a cognitive waveform-selection (CWS) algorithm that can optimally pick the transmit waveform from a prescribed library, in response to information fed back from the receiver to the transmitter. In accordance with dynamic programming, the waveform-selection algorithm seeks to minimize the expected tracking error over a horizon of prescribed length. Approximation of the problem is also studied to mitigate the burden of computational load. To evaluate the system, we introduce computer experiments on a classical ballistic target tracking problem, the results of which confirm the superiority of the CTR over a conventional radar with fixed waveform.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.241 · 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

Citations82
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207