MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analyze the FMCW Waveform Skin Return of Moving Objects in the Presence of Stationary Hidden Objects Using Numerical Models

2020· preprint· en· W3121567644 on OpenAlexaff
Taiwen Tang, Chen Wu, Janaka Elangage

Bibliographic record

VenuePreprints.org · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWaveformFast Fourier transformBeamformingSIGNAL (programming language)ClutterFrequency domainRadarConstant false alarm rateTransmitterAcousticsElectronic engineeringTelecommunicationsAlgorithmComputer visionPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a high-performance antenna array system model is presented to analyze moving-object-skin-returns and track them in the presence of stationary objects using frequency modulated continuous wave (FMCW). The main features of the paper are bonding the aspects of antenna array and electromagnetic (EM) wave multi-skin-return modeling and simulation (M&S) with the aspects of algorithm and measurement/tracking system architecture. The M&S aspect models both phase and amplitude of the signal waveform from a transmitter to the signal processing in a receiver. In the algorithm aspect, a novel scheme for FMCW signal processing is introduced by combining time- and frequency-domain methods, including a vector moving target indication filter and a vector direct current canceller in time-domain, and a constant false alarm rate detector and a mono-pulse digital beamforming angle tracker in frequency-domain. In addition, unlike previous designs of using M×N fast Fourier transform (FFT) for an M×N array, only four FFTs are used, which tremendously saves time and space in hardware. With the presented model, the detection of the moving-target-skin-return in stationary objects under a noisy environment is feasible. Therefore, to track long range and high-speed objects, the proposed technique is promising. Using a scenario having 1) a target with 17 dBm2 radar cross section (RCS) at about 40 km range with 5.93 Mach speed and 11.6 dB post processing signal to noise ratio, and 2) a strong stationary clutter with 37 dBm2 RCS located at the proximity of the target, it demonstrates that the root-mean-square errors of range, angle and Doppler measurements are about 26 meters, 0.68 degree and 1100 Hz, respectively.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.102
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreprints.orgSame topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207