Bibliographic record
Abstract
This report contains a description and performance evaluation of the matrix calibration method developed by the author in 1995 for the receive antenna array in the high frequency surface wave radar (HFSWR) at Cape Race, Newfoundland. The evaluation compares this method with two other methods: (a) the phase-only calibration method being used, and (b) an assumed gain-and-phase method that equalizes the complex element output amplitudes of signals in the boresight direction. The results showed that the matrix calibration method had the most accurate direction estimates, the narrowest spectral peaks, the best resolution of closely space targets, and the lowest signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) threshold for target detection. The phase-only and gain-and-phase methods had false target tracks and direction-dependent biases in direction estimates. The phase-only method also had a line splitting problem. Based on the difference in SINR thresholds for target detection, the matrix calibration method could increase the present maximum nighttime target detection range of the HFSWR by more than 50% in situations where the interference is highly directional and extremely strong.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.007 |
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".