MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3183525235 · doi:10.17762/de.vi.2650

A SOLUTION TO STABILIZE THE RECEIVER BEAMWIDTH WHEN CHANGING THE OPERATING FREQUENCY OF HIGH-FREQUENCY SURFACE WAVE RADAR

2021· article· en· W3183525235 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueDesign Engineering · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Industry and Aquatic Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeamwidthWaveformInterference (communication)Frequency bandFrequency modulationAcousticsRadio spectrumRadarSIGNAL (programming language)Electronic engineeringPhysicsOpticsTelecommunicationsRadio frequencyComputer scienceEngineeringBandwidth (computing)Antenna (radio)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A single-station High-Frequency Surface Wave Radar (HFSRR) consists of transmitting and receiving antennas in an area with a distance between them approximately ten times their wavelength. At the coast, these antennas are usually deployed at fixed optimal distances for an operating frequency in the HF band (3÷30Mhz). Because the signal used is linear frequency modulation (FMCW), the HFSWS always requires an interference-resistant frequency band. So, it is necessary to change the operating frequency in HFSWR to avoid strong interference, frequency bands. This also results in a change in the received waveform, which affects signal processing quality. In this article, a design solution is proposed to maintain a consistent beamwidth when changing the operating frequency in the HFSWS.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.270

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.157 · 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