Robust Weighted l1,2 Norm Filtering in Passive Radar Systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventional methods such as matched filtering, fractional lower order statistics cross ambiguity function, and recent methods such as compressed sensing and track-before-detect are used for target detection by passive radars. Target detection using these algorithms usually assumes that the background noise is Gaussian. However, non-Gaussian impulsive noise is inherent in real world radar problems. In this paper, a new optimization based algorithm that uses weighted l 1 and l 2 norms is proposed as an alternative to the existing algorithms whose performance degrades in the presence of impulsive noise. To determine the weights of these norms, the parameter that quantifies the impulsiveness level of the noise is estimated. In the proposed algorithm, the aim is to increase the target detection performance of a universal mobile telecommunication system (UMTS) based passive radars by facilitating higher resolution with better suppression of the sidelobes in both range and Doppler. The results obtained from both simulated data with α stable distribution, and real data recorded by a UMTS based passive radar platform are presented to demonstrate the superiority of the proposed algorithm. The results show that the proposed algorithm provides more robust and accurate detection performance for noise models with different impulsiveness levels compared to the conventional methods.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".