Performance analysis of RADARSAT-2 multi-channel MODEX modes
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
It has been recognized that a two-aperture approach to ground moving target indication is sub-optimum and that target parameter estimation is often compromised by clutter interference or poor signal-to-clutter ratios. This paper investigates the Ground Moving Target Indication (GMTI) performance of several virtual channel concepts proposed for the RADARSAT- 2 Moving Object Detection EXperiment (MODEX). These are capable of increasing the spatial diversity of RADARSAT-2 by exploiting its very flexible antenna programming capabilities and allowing the two-channel SAR system to operate like a three or four channel radar. A high fidelity Space-Based Radar Moving Target Indication Simulator (SBRMTISIM) is used to generate virtual channel raw GMTI data for analysis. Moving targets are detected using a combination of the Factored Space-Time Adaptive Processing (Factored STAP) and the Cell-Averaging Constant False Alarm Rate (CA-CFAR) detector. The detection performance of virtual multi-channel MODEX modes are analyzed and compared with those of the standard two-channel MODEX mode and a true three or four channel space-based radar system.
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