MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Optimal radar ranging pulse to resolve two reflectors

2024· article· en· W4402901781 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew N. Jordan, John C. Howell, Achim Kempf, Shunxing Zhang, Derek White

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRadar Systems and Signal Processing
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersChapman UniversityKavli Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of California, Santa BarbaraNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRangingRadarPulse (music)Remote sensingGeologyComputer scienceOpticsGeodesyPhysicsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous work established fundamental bounds on subwavelength resolution for the radar range resolution problem, called superradar []. In this work, we identify the optimal waveforms for distinguishing the range resolution between two reflectors of identical strength, leveraging results in quantum metrology. We discuss both the unnormalized optimal waveform as well as the best square-integrable pulse and their variants. Using orthogonal function theory, we give an explicit algorithm to optimize the wave pulse in finite time to have the best performance. We also explore range resolution estimation with unnormalized waveforms with multiparameter methods to also independently estimate loss and time of arrival. These results are consistent with the earlier single parameter approach of range resolution only and give deeper insight into the ranging estimation problem. Experimental results are presented using radio pulse reflections inside coaxial cables, showing robust range resolution smaller than a tenth of the inverse bandlimit, with uncertainties close to the derived Cramér-Rao bound. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.373 · 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ResearchSame topicRadar Systems and Signal ProcessingFrench-language works237,207