MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2104337872 · doi:10.1049/ip-rsn:20045094

Ground moving target parameter estimation for two-channel SAR

2006· article· en· W2104337872 on OpenAlexaff
Christoph H. Gierull

Bibliographic record

VenueIEE Proceedings - Radar Sonar and Navigation · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced SAR Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarAzimuthComputer scienceChannel (broadcasting)Remote sensingFilter (signal processing)Track (disk drive)Inverse synthetic aperture radarInterferometryRadarGeologyRadar imagingComputer visionTelecommunicationsPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author introduces and analyses the performance of different techniques to estimate the parameters of ground moving targets in multi-channel synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data. Candidates are matched filter banks, the along-track interferometric phase and direction-of-arrival estimation methods, which can work in either the raw data or in the compressed SAR image domain. Of particular interest are systems with only two channels because many existing or near-future SAR systems, such as RADARSAT-2 and TerraSAR-X, are restricted to a maximum of two sub-apertures. Desired parameters are the two velocity components (along- and across-track), acceleration if present and the true azimuth location. Theoretical results are evaluated and illustrated with experimental airborne SAR data.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.234 · 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

Citations97
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEE Proceedings - Radar Sonar and NavigationSame topicAdvanced SAR Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207