MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011950387 · doi:10.3390/app10061914

Theory and Design of Blink Jamming

2020· article· en· W3011950387 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

VenueApplied Sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJammingRadar jamming and deceptionMonopulse radarComputer scienceDeceptionMissileRadarSimulationEngineeringHuman–computer interactionAerospace engineeringPsychologyTelecommunicationsRadar imagingPulse-Doppler radar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Establishing an error in the angle estimates of a monopulse radar is critical to creating miss distance during the terminal stage of missile engagements. However, the tools for creating angle deception are limited, with blink jamming offering significant potential. This paper fills in the conceptual gaps in understanding of blink jamming, through a theoretical analysis, which is validated using modelling and simulation, including hardware-in-the-loop with a Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA). Additionally, a novel version of blink jamming is proposed, using a synchronized amplitude modulation, and its performance compared to traditional, unmodulated blink jamming. The complete results are discussed, with design guidance provided for implementing blink jamming in operational scenarios.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.682
Threshold uncertainty score0.139

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.189 · 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