MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390190298 · doi:10.1109/iccvw60793.2023.00435

T-FFTRadNet: Object Detection with Swin Vision Transformers from Raw ADC Radar Signals

2023· article· en· W4390190298 on OpenAlexaff
James Giroux, Martin Bouchard, Robert Laganière

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced SAR Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRadarArtificial intelligenceRadar imagingComputer visionPulse-Doppler radarContinuous-wave radarObject detectionRadar engineering detailsFire-control radarRadar lock-onLidarDoppler radarFast Fourier transformRemote sensingPattern recognition (psychology)GeographyAlgorithmTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Object detection utilizing Frequency Modulated Continuous Wave radar is becoming increasingly popular in the field of autonomous systems. Radar does not possess the same drawbacks seen by other emission-based sensors such as LiDAR, primarily the degradation or loss of return signals due to weather conditions such as rain or snow. However, radar does possess traits that make it unsuitable for standard emission-based deep learning representations such as point clouds. Radar point clouds tend to be sparse and therefore information extraction is not efficient. To overcome this, more traditional digital signal processing pipelines were adapted to form inputs residing directly in the frequency domain via Fast Fourier Transforms. Commonly, three transformations were used to form Range-Azimuth-Doppler cubes in which deep learning algorithms could perform object detection. This too has drawbacks, namely the pre-processing costs associated with performing multiple Fourier Transforms and normalization. We explore the possibility of operating on raw radar inputs from analog to digital converters via the utilization of complex transformation layers. Moreover, we introduce hierarchical Swin Vision transformers to the field of radar object detection and show their capability to operate on inputs varying in pre-processing, along with different radar configurations, i.e., relatively low and high numbers of transmitters and receivers, while obtaining on par or better results than the state-of-the-art.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.224 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced SAR Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207