MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981753322 · doi:10.1109/taes.2019.2948451

Expanding Window Dynamic-Programming-Based Track-Before-Detect With Order Statistics in Weibull Distributed Clutter

2019· article· en· W2981753322 on OpenAlexaff
Mostafa Elhoshy, Fayez Gebali, T. Aaron Gulliver

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClutterTrack-before-detectWeibull distributionComputer scienceSliding window protocolRadarRadar trackerWindow (computing)Constant false alarm rateAlgorithmDynamic programmingTrack (disk drive)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article considers radar detection and tracking of weak fluctuating targets using dynamic programming (DP)-based track-before-detect (TBD). The clutter is modeled using a Weibull distribution, and the well-known Swerling type 0, 1, and 3 targets are considered. An efficient algorithm is proposed, which employs order statistics in DP-based TBD to detect weak fluctuating targets. In addition, a novel expanding window track-before-detect (EW-TBD) technique for multiframe processing is presented to improve the detection performance with reasonable computational complexity compared to batch processing. It is shown that EW-TBD has lower complexity than existing multiframe processing techniques. Simulation results are presented, which confirm the superiority of the proposed expanding window technique in detecting targets even when they are not present in every scan in the window. In addition, the throughput of the proposed technique is higher than that with batch processing.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations39
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic SystemsSame topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207