MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188858993

Enhanced Differential Detection Scheme for Weak GPS Signal Acquisition

2007· article· en· W2188858993 on OpenAlexaff
Surendran K. Shanmugam, John Nielsen, G. Lachapelle

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the 20th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS 2007) · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGNSS positioning and interference
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDetectorLikelihood-ratio testEstimatorAlgorithmDetection theoryDifferential (mechanical device)Matched filterGlobal Positioning SystemFilter (signal processing)MathematicsComputer scienceElectronic engineeringStatisticsPhysicsEngineeringTelecommunicationsComputer vision
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper several detector schemes for processing weak GPS signals in an unaided acquisition scenario are described and analyzed. Fundamental theoretical considerations based on the generalized likelihood ratio test (GLRT), as applied to GPS signal detection, are discussed. It is shown that the asymptotic version of the GLRT is equivalent to an estimator correlator (EC). For assumed deterministic signals the GLRT further reduces to a matched filter. This implies that the navigation data code phase and carrier parameters are known. In this paper, we unify the well-known post-correlation noncoherent detection and the newly proposed postcorrelation differential detection in terms of GLRT and EC formulation. As well the generalized post-correlation differential detector scheme, which is a hybrid of postcorrelation, non-coherent integration and differential detectors is analyzed. Simulation results, as well as hardware based experimental measurements, are given to validate the claims of the acquisition sensitivity improvements of the proposed detection scheme.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the 20th International Technical Meeting of the Satellite Division of The Institute of Navigation (ION GNSS 2007)Same topicGNSS positioning and interferenceFrench-language works237,207