MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139475389 · doi:10.1109/asspcc.2000.882504

SAR-GMTI processing with Canada's Radarsat 2 satellite

2002· article· en· W2139475389 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T.J. Nohara, Philipp Weber, A. Premji, C.E. Livingstone

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoving target indicationClutterSynthetic aperture radarComputer scienceVisibilityRemote sensingSpace-time adaptive processingRadarSatelliteInverse synthetic aperture radarSpace-based radarSecondary surveillance radarRadar imagingComputer visionContinuous-wave radarTelecommunicationsGeographyEngineeringAerospace engineeringMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Space-based radar (SBR) has been proposed for various military and civilian applications, including wide area surveillance and theatre defence. Reliable, slow, ground moving target indication (GMTI) of tanks and jeeps, for example, poses a significant challenge, due to strong clutter returns that occupy most, if not all of the available spectrum. Space-time adaptive processing (STAP) techniques can be used to implement radar signal processors capable of providing the required sub-clutter visibility. Despite extensive research studies, at present no space-based GMTI systems are in operation. Canada and the United States are presently conducting experimental programs that will include the launching of space-based radar systems capable of synthetic aperture radar (SAR) and GMTI modes. This paper reports on Canada's Radarsat 2 GMTI mode and provides a preliminary analysis of SAR-GMTI performance based on computer simulations.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.657
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.146
Teacher spread0.139 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations22
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207