MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953532840 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2019.2920092

Radio Frequency Interference Suppression for HF Surface Wave Radar Using CEMD and Temporal Windowing Methods

2019· article· en· W2953532840 on OpenAlexafffund
Mohsen Eslami Nazari, Weimin Huang, Chen Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsInterference (communication)Hilbert–Huang transformElectromagnetic interferenceComputer scienceRadarFrequency domainSurface waveTime–frequency analysisFrequency modulationAmplitudeAcousticsElectronic engineeringRadio frequencyRemote sensingGeologyEngineeringPhysicsTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)Optics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A common source of interference in high-frequency (HF) surface wave (HFSW) radars is radio frequency interference (RFI). Its existence inhibits the detection performance of HFSW radars since its amplitude can mask the sea echoes. On the basis of the analysis of RFI characteristics, a new RFI mitigation algorithm based on inverse temporal windowing and complex empirical mode decomposition (CEMD) is proposed in this letter. In this method, echoes containing RFI are decomposed into a number of intrinsic mode functions (IMFs) via CEMD and then the inverse temporal windowing technique is applied to each IMFs in the time domain. Test results show that the proposed method outperforms the conventional method in simulated and practical conditions and can effectively mitigate RFI without losing sea echoes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations42
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing LettersSame topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207