An Investigation of Rotary Drone HERM Line Spectrum under Manoeuvering Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Detecting and identifying drones is of great interest due to the proliferation of highly manoeuverable drones with on-board sensors of increasing sensing capabilities. In this paper, we investigate the use of radars for tackling this problem. In particular, we focus on the problem of detecting rotary drones and distinguishing between single-propeller and multi-propeller drones using a micro-Doppler analysis. Two different radars were used, an ultra wideband (UWB) continuous wave (CW) C-band radar and an automotive frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW) W-band radar, to collect micro-Doppler signatures of the drones. By taking a closer look at HElicopter Rotor Modulation (HERM) lines, the spool and chopping lines are identified for the first time in the context of drones to determine the number of propeller blades. Furthermore, a new multi-frequency analysis method using HERM lines is developed, which allows the detection of propeller rotation rates (spool and chopping frequencies) of single and multi-propeller drones. Therefore, the presented method is a promising technique to aid in the classification of drones.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".