MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2910924418 · doi:10.1049/iet-rsn.2018.5423

Design of multiple near‐orthogonal spectrally‐compliant waveforms via alternating successive convex approximations and projections

2019· article· en· W2910924418 on OpenAlexafffund
Alison K. Cheeseman, Raviraj Adve

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Radar Sonar & Navigation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsWaveformRegular polygonAlgorithmMathematicsComputer scienceTelecommunicationsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors consider the design of multiple near‐orthogonal transmit waveforms for a high‐frequency surface wave radar (HFSWR) system operating in a congested spectral environment where the radar must adhere to strict regulations on the interference it can cause to on‐going communication links. The HFSWR application necessitates multiple waveforms to increase the overall unambiguous radar range. Ideally, the waveforms would be constant amplitude, have low autocorrelation sidelobes, and low pulse‐to‐pulse cross‐correlations, all while meeting the imposed spectral constraints; however, it is impossible to know a priori that such waveforms exist. They propose an algorithm based on alternating successive convex approximations and projections to design waveforms with low pulse‐to‐pulse cross‐correlation which meet strict spectral and autocorrelation sidelobe constraints while minimising the amplitude modulation. In the simulation, the proposed algorithm is found to converge rapidly and when compared to similar methods from the recent literature, the proposed algorithm is found to generate waveforms with significantly lower peak‐to‐average power ratios and better pulse compression properties.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.935
Threshold uncertainty score0.566

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 communication0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Radar Sonar & NavigationSame topicImage and Signal Denoising MethodsFrench-language works237,207