MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065043959 · doi:10.1117/12.601373

Passive geolocation and tracking of an unknown number of emitters

2005· article· en· W2065043959 on OpenAlexaff
T. Sathyan, Abhijit Sinha, T. Kirubarajan

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGuidance and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeolocationTracking (education)Computer scienceWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous researches related to geolocation based on the time difference of arrival (TDOA) technique focused mainly on solving the nonlinear equations that relate the TDOA measurements to the unknown source location. They, however, considered a rather simplistic scenario: a single emitter with no possibility of either missed detections, or false measurements. In real world scenarios, one must resolve the important issue of measurement-origin uncertainty, before applying these techniques. This paper proposes an algorithm for the geolocation and tracking of multiple emitters in practical scenarios. The focus is on solving the all important data association problem, i.e., deciding from which target, if any, a measurement originated. A previous solution for data association based on the assignment formulation for passive measurement tracking systems relied on solving two assignment problems: an S-dimensional (or, SD, where S ≥ 3) assignment for association across sensors, and a 2D assignment for measurement-to-track association. Here, an (S + 1)D assignment algorithm, which performs the data association in one step, is introduced. As can be seen later, the (S+1)D assignment formulation reduces the computational cost significantly. Incorporation of correlated measurements (which is the case with TDOA measurements) into the SD framework that typically assumes uncorrelated measurements, is also discussed. The nonlinear TDOA equations are posed as an optimization problem, and solved using SolvOpt: a nonlinear optimization solver. The interacting multiple model (IMM) estimator is used in conjunction with the unscented Kalman filter (UKF) to track the geolocated emitters.

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)0.001
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
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.212 · 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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicGuidance and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207