MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131476315 · doi:10.1109/taes.2011.5937266

Detection Performance using Frequency Diversity with Distributed Sensors

2011· article· en· W2131476315 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAntenna diversityDiversity schemeInterference (communication)Computer scienceSpace-time adaptive processingContext (archaeology)RadarDiversity combiningSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Diversity gainElectronic engineeringRadar engineering detailsTelecommunicationsRadar imagingFadingEngineeringGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detection using a frequency diverse (FD), distributed, radar system is investigated. Distributed sensing systems provide an inherent spatial diversity by viewing a potential target from different aspect angles. By using different frequencies at each platform, a diversity gain is obtained in addition to the advantages of spatial diversity while also avoiding mutual interference. Here, since platforms are distributed spatially, true time delay is used at each platform to align the sample look point in time. Data models for a distributed system with and without frequency diversity are developed. These models are used to analyze the corresponding signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) and probability of detection for the two cases in the context of space-time adaptive processing (STAP). The simulation results presented here illustrate the limitations imposed by mutual interference and the significant benefits of spatial and frequency diversity.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.644

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.174
Teacher spread0.159 · 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