MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145346568 · doi:10.1109/icsess.2012.6269512

Analysis of detecting target in sea clutter using decoupled echo state network

2012· article· en· W2145346568 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
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Reservoir Computing
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClutterEcho (communications protocol)Echo state networkComputer scienceRadarSet (abstract data type)Sea stateTime seriesStationary target indicationData setArtificial intelligenceSeries (stratigraphy)State (computer science)Remote sensingPattern recognition (psychology)AlgorithmGeologyContinuous-wave radarArtificial neural networkRecurrent neural networkRadar imagingMachine learningTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter use echo state network (ESN) and three decoupled echo state network (DESN) to predict the sea clutter time series and detect target embedded in sea clutter. The performance of predicting and detecting using these methods is compared. A set of time series from IPIX radar data is tested. Numerical experiments reveal that DESN with maximum available information (DESN+MaxInfo) and DESN with reservoir prediction (DESN+RP) show higher prediction precision in pure sea clutter data. ESN has the better effect for detecting target in sea clutter.

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)0.001
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 score0.337
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeural Networks and Reservoir ComputingFrench-language works237,207