Ground Target Tracking Using an Airborne Angle-Only Sensor with Terrain Uncertainty and Sensor Biases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Airborne angle-only sensors can be used to track stationary or mobile ground targets. In order to make the problem observable in 3-dimensions (3-D), the height of the target (i.e., the height of the terrain) from the sea-level is needed to be known. In most of the existing works, the terrain height is assumed to be known accurately. However, the terrain height is usually obtained from Digital Terrain Elevation Data (DTED), which has different resolution levels. Ignoring the terrain height uncertainty in a tracking algorithm will lead to a bias in the estimated states. In addition to the terrain uncertainty, another common source of uncertainty in angle-only sensors is the sensor biases. Both these uncertainties must be handled properly to obtain better tracking accuracy. In this paper, we propose algorithms to estimate the sensor biases with the target(s) of opportunity and algorithms to track targets with terrain and sensor bias uncertainties. Sensor bias uncertainties can be reduced by estimating the biases using the measurements from the target(s) of opportunity with known horizontal positions. This step can be an optional step in an angle-only tracking problem. In this work, we have proposed algorithms to pick optimal targets of opportunity to obtain better bias estimation and algorithms to estimate the biases with the selected target(s) of opportunity. Finally, we provide a filtering framework to track the targets with terrain and bias uncertainties. The Posterior Cramer-Rao Lower Bound (PCRLB), which provides the lower bound on achievable estimation error, is derived for the single target filtering with an angle-only sensor with terrain uncertainty and measurement biases. The effectiveness of the proposed algorithms is verified by Monte Carlo simulations. The simulation results show that sensor biases can be estimated accurately using the target(s) of opportunity and the tracking accuracies of the targets can be improved significantly using the proposed algorithms when the terrain and bias uncertainties are present.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".