MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2163544109 · doi:10.1109/radar.2008.4720806

Diversity order of joint detection in distributed radar networks

2008· article· en· W2163544109 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDistributed Sensor Networks and Detection Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMedical Research CouncilUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsComputer scienceDiversity (politics)Joint (building)StatisticRadar detectionRadarOrder statisticLogarithmTelecommunicationsMathematicsStatisticsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent work we introduced the notion of diversity in distributed radar systems and we evaluated the diversity order of fully distributed networks. Our long-term goal is to analyze the trade-off between distributed detection and detection using co-located antennas. In this paper, we extend our earlier analysis and we evaluate the diversity of joint detection for symmetric noise-limited systems. The Neyman-Pearson (NP) statistic for joint detection is shown to follow a Gamma distribution. We prove that the diversity order of large networks is on the order of radicK, thus outperforming the logarithmic diversity order of fully distributed detection. We finally provide simulations validating our theoretical analysis.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.179 · 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