MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Extended Target Frequency Response Estimation Using Infinite Hmm in Cognitive Radars

2019· article· en· W3003863705 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed A. Abouelfadl, Ioannis Psaromiligkos, Benoı̂t Champagne

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParticle filterComputer scienceKalman filterHidden Markov modelAlgorithmGaussianInterference (communication)RadarSequential estimationTrack-before-detectRadar trackerAdditive white Gaussian noiseJammingBayesian probabilityFilter (signal processing)WaveformArtificial intelligenceWhite noiseTelecommunicationsComputer visionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A cognitive radar adapts its waveform to match the extended target's frequency response (TFR) for optimized detection performance. In practice, the TFR is unknown and is usually estimated using the Kalman filter assuming a linear Gaussian model. However, this assumption is not always fulfilled and other filters as the particle filter should be used. In all cases, existing approaches require the complete knowledge of the statistical distributions of both the TFR and interference. In this paper, we present a novel formulation of the TFR estimation problem that allows us to use the infinite hidden Markov model (iHMM) to estimate and track the TFR without such prior knowledge. Monte Carlo simulations considering Gaussian and non-Gaussian distributions for TFR and interference as well as jamming effects show that the proposed iHMM-based method ameliorates the estimation accuracy compared to the conventional Bayesian filtering techniques.

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)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207