MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401990371 · doi:10.1109/tsp.2024.3435065

Estimating Resonances in Low-SNR Late-Time Radar Returns With Sampling Jitter

2024· article· en· W4401990371 on OpenAlexaff
Metody Georgiev, Timothy N. Davidson

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Signal Processing · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor Networks
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJitterComputer scienceRadarSampling (signal processing)AlgorithmTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The frequency and attenuation rate of a resonance in the late-time return of a radar signal are indicative of a target's geometry and conductivity, and hence they can be used as features in a variety of filtering and classification applications. However, late-time returns are typically observed over short windows at low signal-to-noise ratios (SNRs, averaged over the window), and often in the presence of sampling jitter. This can make the estimation of these parameters difficult, even when multiple measurement shots are available. In this article, we develop a new multi-shot estimation method that is based on models for the distribution of the roots of the z-transform of the received signal. Under an additive-Gaussian-noise model, we have a closed-form expression for the root distribution in terms of the resonance parameters, and the parameters are estimated by matching the model distribution to the empirical distribution. The root distribution has a strong dependence on the frequency and attenuation rate, and leads to significantly better estimates than existing techniques at low SNRs. By developing approximate models, we extend these performance advantages to scenarios with significant sampling jitter and synchronization offsets.

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)0.006
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Signal ProcessingSame topicTarget Tracking and Data Fusion in Sensor NetworksFrench-language works237,207