MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156751500 · doi:10.1109/radar.2008.4720732

Analysis of concatenated waveforms and required STC

2008· article· en· W2156751500 on OpenAlexaff
Jian Wang, Eli Brookner, Mark Gerecke

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsRaytheon Technologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlankingPulse compressionComputer scienceWaveformRadarRange (aeronautics)Power (physics)Pulse (music)Sensitivity (control systems)Electronic engineeringTelecommunicationsAcousticsPhysicsEngineeringDetector

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In modern surveillance radar, pulse compression is applied to achieve long range coverage while maintaining both low transmit peak power and desired range resolution. When there is a requirement to increase the radarpsilas range without a corresponding increase in the transmitted peak power it is required that a longer uncompressed pulse be used. As a consequence the blind range, associated with blanking the receiver whilst transmitting the pulse, will increase and short range coverage will be lost. In this paper we initially present a system of concatenated waveforms that provide simultaneous radar coverage for both near and far ranges. The solution incorporates a combination of longer sub-pulses for far range and shorter sub-pulses for near range. Although the concatenated waveforms have a number of attractive attributes, they present a challenging problem in that different sub-pulses will reflect back from different ranges and be received at the same time. Therefore since each sub-pulse is not separable at the RF front end a more complex sensitivity time control (STC) is required. In the second part of this paper we analyze this phenomenon and propose a STC scheme to address the issue.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.198
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations6
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207