On optimum multi‐input multi‐output radar signal design: Ambiguity function, manifold structure and duration‐bandwidth
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A design technique is developed for the probing signals of a Multi‐Input Multi‐Output (MIMO) radar. The concentration of the energy of the signal in its essential duration and essential bandwidth is achieved through the use of a class of time‐frequency concentrated functions called the WLJ functions as the synthesizing signal set. The goal is to design a signal vector having a pre‐specified desired covariance (CoV) matrix while ensuring that the side‐lobes of the ambiguity functions are small. Since CoV matrices are structurally constrained, they form a manifold in the signal space. Hence, we argue that the difference between these matrices should not be measured in terms of the conventional Euclidean distance (ED); rather, the distance should be measured along the surface of the manifold, that is, in terms of a Riemannian distance (RD). In either case, the signal optimisation problem is non‐convex in the design variables, involving, respectively, a quartic and a square‐root objective function. An efficient algorithm based on successive convex approximation is developed in which the original non‐convex problems are transformed so that they can be approximated by a convex quadratically constrained quadratic problem at each stage, resulting in good approximate solutions. Comparing the designs using ED and RD, we find that the convergence of the algorithm can be significantly faster when optimising over the manifold (RD) than when optimising over the whole space (ED). More importantly, for tight constraints, the use of RD yields solutions which satisfy the constraints far better than the use of ED.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".