MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2807798408 · doi:10.1109/radar.2018.8378789

Heavy-tailed sea clutter modeling for shore-based radar detection

2018· article· en· W2807798408 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Song, T. Bahadir Sarikaya, Selda Taşkın Serkan, Ratnasingham Tharmarasa, E. Sobaci, Thiagalingam Kirubarajan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClutterRayleigh distributionRadarRemote sensingK-distributionShoreProbability distributionStatistical powerStatistical modelRadar horizonComputer scienceProbability density functionGeologyRadar imagingStatisticsContinuous-wave radarMathematicsArtificial intelligenceTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Detecting targets embedded in sea clutter poses a clutter-modeling challenge for marine surveillance radar. In this paper, the statistical modeling of sea clutter observed by an X-band high-resolution coastal radar at very low grazing angles (1.05°-1.72°) is investigated. The aim of this paper is to identify the best-fitting statistical distribution to the data with particular attention to the application in the detection scenario. The global goodness-of-fit to the sea clutter distribution and the local fit to only the tail region are both evaluated since the detection probability depends on the whole region of distribution while the detection threshold is mainly determined by the tail region. The results suggest that the Log-logistic distribution is optimal to model the whole region of sea clutter distribution while the recently developed K+Rayleigh distribution, which accounts for thermal noise, fits the tail region best. A general method of calculating the expected probability of detection is also derived to evaluate how the global fit affects the expected probability of detection calculation.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207