MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807154995 · doi:10.1109/plans.2018.8373364

Combining secondary code correlations for fast GNSS signal acquisition

2018· article· en· W2807154995 on OpenAlexaff
Jérôme Leclère, René Landry

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicGNSS positioning and interference
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTime delay and integrationComputer scienceUSableCode (set theory)AlgorithmSynchronization (alternating current)Sensitivity (control systems)Computer engineeringElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The secondary codes of the modern GNSS signals bring some notable advantages, however they constitute a challenge for the acquisition process. Indeed, it becomes much more difficult to extend the coherent integration time with these codes. Several methods have been proposed for increasing the coherent integration time when there is a secondary code. Basically, the methods fall into two categories : 1) Methods with long coherent integration times, which require synchronization with the secondary code and imply a significant computational burden, and 2) Methods with short coherent integration times, which test all possible combinations for the secondary code. Since this leads to an exponential increase in the number of combinations, the coherent integration time remains limited, while non-coherent integrations are not usable. Therefore, there is currently no effective solution with intermediate coherent integration time, which would enable moderate to high sensitivity, while maintaining a reasonable level of complexity. In this paper, a method is proposed to address this problem. The method combines secondary code correlations to reduce the number of possible secondary code delays and reduce the complexity. In exchange, there is a loss in the signal-to-noise ratio as compared to the full secondary code correlation. It is shown that the proposed method offers similar or better performance than the short integration times method, in addition to offering the possibility of using non-coherent integrations, and offers lower complexity than the traditional long integration times method with greater sensitivity.

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)0.003
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGNSS positioning and interferenceFrench-language works237,207