MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2991134859 · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2954330

Deep Sea TDOA Localization Method Based on Improved OMP Algorithm

2019· article· en· W2991134859 on OpenAlexaff
Feng Jiang, Zhenkai Zhang, Hamid Esmaeili Najafabadi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndoor and Outdoor Localization Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersQinglan Project of Jiangsu Province of ChinaGovernment of Jiangsu ProvinceChina Postdoctoral Science FoundationNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsMultilaterationComputer scienceAlgorithmMultipath propagationMatching pursuitSynchronization (alternating current)Least-squares function approximationInterference (communication)Stability (learning theory)Compressed sensingAccelerationReal-time computingMathematicsTelecommunicationsAzimuth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compressed sensing is recently applied to time delay estimation, resulting in higher accuracy and stability compared to traditional methods. In this paper, a time delay estimation model is designed based on adaptive iterative local searching orthogonal matching pursuit (AILSOMP) algorithm, and an improved three-stage weighted least squares localization algorithm is proposed using the time delay values. Firstly, the sensor receives acoustic waves from the target in the deep-sea multipath environment. It then obtains the rectilinear propagation time delay of the sound wave through compressed sensing. Secondly, the time synchronization between the two sensors is maintained, and the difference between the estimated delays of both sensors is multiplied by the speed of sound to obtain the measured distance value. Finally, an improved three-stage weighted least squares algorithm is applied to locate the target using the time difference of arrival (TDOA). Simulation results confirm that the proposed algorithm has better localization performance compared to other methods in a multipath interference environment.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.719

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations15
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicIndoor and Outdoor Localization TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207