MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Extended Target Frequency Response Estimation Using Infinite Hmm in Cognitive Radars

2019· article· en· W3003863705 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

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.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.676
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.023
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