MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386320497 · doi:10.1109/taes.2023.3310493

Minimization of Internally Reflected Power Via Waveform Design in Cognitive MIMO Radar

2023· article· en· W4386320497 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed A. Abouelfadl, Ioannis Psaromiligkos, Benoı̂t Champagne

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWaveformRadarMIMOElectronic engineeringComputer sciencePower (physics)Pulse-Doppler radarMinificationElectrical engineeringEngineeringTelecommunicationsPhysicsRadar imagingBeamforming

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

State-of-the-art cognitive multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO) radars maximize the signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) for an extended target of interest by matching the transmitted waveforms to the target impulse response (TIR). Existing methods to match the transmitted waveforms do not consider the problem of internally reflected power due to the mutual coupling between the transmitting antenna array elements, which results in transmitter inefficiency and possible hardware damage. While the mutual coupling problem in MIMO radars has been handled using microwave techniques heretofore, we herein advocate a signal-processing approach to this problem in cognitive MIMO radars. Specifically, we propose an effective waveform design formalism allowing to jointly maximize the SINR and minimize the reflected power from the transmitting antennas under a TIR matching constraint, while achieving waveform orthogonality in the Doppler domain. Minimizing the reflected power is achieved through the incorporation of a regularization term, taking the form of an $\ell _{\infty }$-norm, in the objective function of a minimum variance distortionless response criterion. An efficient proximal gradient method is developed to solve the resulting nonsmooth optimization problem. Simulations with different TIR distributions and transmitting antenna array sizes show that the proposed waveform design algorithm results in lower active reflection coefficients for the antenna elements than selected benchmarks. Furthermore, our algorithm offers a competitive SINR performance compared to these benchmarks and can cope with the fast-varying TIR.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic SystemsSame topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207