MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2257226590 · doi:10.1049/iet-rsn.2015.0196

Experimental validation of coherent multiple‐input multiple‐output radar antenna patterns

2015· article· en· W2257226590 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

VenueIET Radar Sonar & Navigation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhased arrayMIMORadiation patternAntenna (radio)Antenna arrayRadarElectronic engineering3G MIMOComputer scienceActive electronically scanned arrayOpticsPhysicsTelecommunicationsAcousticsRadar engineering detailsRadar imagingEngineeringBeamforming

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study specifies the antenna radiation patterns of a linear array radar operating in a phased array configuration and in two colocated multiple‐input multiple‐output (MIMO) configurations. The MIMO‐1 configuration uses orthogonal transmission on all elements, while the MIMO‐2 configuration uses orthogonal transmission on the two end elements. The theoretical two‐way antenna radiation patterns are derived for all three configurations. Field experiments with an eight‐element, X ‐band linear array radar and trihedral targets are then described. The experimental mainbeam patterns are shown to match those of the theoretical patterns. MIMO‐1 is shown to have the same two‐way radiation pattern as that of the phased array radar configuration. Compared with MIMO‐1 and phased array, MIMO‐2 has enhanced angle estimation accuracy, lower gain, and higher sidelobes while only requiring two orthogonal waveforms on transmit.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.218 · 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