MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140657699 · doi:10.1109/radar.2008.4720808

Frequency diversity in multistatic radars

2008· article· en· W2140657699 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

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultistatic radarComputer scienceAntenna diversityDiversity schemeRadarDiversity (politics)Interference (communication)Radar systemsSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Noise (video)Bistatic radarElectronic engineeringRemote sensingTelecommunicationsRadar imagingGeographyArtificial intelligenceEngineeringFadingAntenna (radio)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents the model and analysis of a frequency-diverse radar system. Multistatic radar systems provide an inherent spatial diversity by processing signals from different platforms which view a potential target from different aspect angles. By using different frequencies at each platform, an additional diversity gain can be obtained on top of the advantages of spatial diversity. Here, since platforms are distributed spatially, true time delay is used at each platform to align the sample look point in time. The signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio and probability of detection are derived for the case for the frequency diverse and the non-frequency diverse cases. Comparing these two cases illustrates the significant benefits of frequency diversity. In addition, performances of optimum and suboptimum decentralized algorithms are compared.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.393
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.171 · 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

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207