Reinforcement Learning Based Joint Detection and Tracking of Target for Compact HFSWR
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
Compact high-frequency surface wave radar (HF-SWR) suffers from a low signal-to-noise ratio and low target detection probability, leading to track fragmentations during target tracking. To improve the target tracking continuity, a joint detection and tracking framework based on reinforcement learning (RL) is proposed. First, the interaction between the detector and tracker is established and a local range-Doppler (R-D) region where a target of interest may be located is extracted according to the predicted target state provided by the tracker. Second, the detector, as an agent of RL, perceives the detection background within the local R-D region and the track update status of the target. Finally, optimal detection thresholds in this local R-D region are determined to adapt to the current environment, and candidate target plots can be generated and provided to the tracker for target tracking. Experimental results demonstrate that the proposed method improves the detection probability of compact HFSWR significantly and track fragmentations caused by missed detections are greatly reduced.
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