MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2550139263 · doi:10.33012/2016.13487

Performance of Antenna Array Calibration in Multipath Environments

2016· article· en· W2550139263 on OpenAlexaff
Niranjan Vagle, Ali Broumandan, Ali Jafarnia Jahromi, G�rard Lachapelle

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institute of Navigation ... International Technical Meeting/Proceedings of the ... International Technical Meeting of The Institute of Navigation · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAntenna Design and Optimization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultipath propagationGNSS applicationsMultipath mitigationCalibrationComputer scienceAntenna (radio)BeamformingMultipath interferenceInterference (communication)Remote sensingAntenna arrayElectronic engineeringGlobal Positioning SystemTelecommunicationsEngineeringGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Antenna array processing is gaining attention in the GNSS community due to its ability to mitigate different types of interference. Array calibration is the first step towards implementation of most of the distortionless beamforming techniques. In the case of a GNSS, antenna array calibration can be performed using live signals. Since several satellite signals are available from different directions at the same time, the calibration process can incorporate all available GNSS signals. It is required to have a data set without any electronic interference or multipath to avoid errors in the calibration process. However, multipath is a major challenge for calibration and exists almost everywhere. The carrier phase measurements used to estimate the calibration parameters are affected by multipath, which introduces significant gain and phase errors. Due to this, the calibration parameters estimated would normally be erroneous. Carrier phase multipath in GNSS is periodic in nature with zero mean. This feature is exploited herein to improve calibration in multipath environments. By filtering the relative phase measurements between the antenna elements over several multipath periods, estimation of calibration parameters can be improved. As multipath period is longer for a static user than for a moving one, averaging time required to remove multipath is longer in the static case. This is demonstrated through simulated and live GNSS signals.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institute of Navigation ... International Technical Meeting/Proceedings of the ... International Technical Meeting of The Institute of NavigationSame topicAntenna Design and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207