Underwater source localization using time difference of arrival and frequency difference of arrival measurements based on an improved invasive weed optimization algorithm
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this study, we propose an underwater localization method based on an improved invasive weed optimization algorithm to accurately locate moving sources in underwater sensor networks. First, the Lévy flight model is introduced into the invasive weed optimization algorithm to enhance its global search ability and avoid falling into local optima. At the same time, under the condition that the observed noise of each observation is Gaussian noise and does not consider the influence of other error factors, the localization error is adopted as the objective function to obtain an initial estimate for the unknown source parameter. Then, the obtained initial estimates of the target position and velocity as well as the target parameter error are utilized to construct a new localization model. Finally, the precise position of the source and its velocity are obtained according to the weighted least square method. The performance of the algorithm is verified by comparing it with the Cramér–Rao Lower Bound (CRLB). Results from simulations indicate that the algorithm proposed in this paper has excellent localization accuracy compared to existing methods and achieves results close to the CRLB.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it