MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405699004 · doi:10.1049/rsn2.12685

High sensitivity multi‐channel digital receiver for wideband very weak signal direction‐finding classified by machine learning

2024· article· en· W4405699004 on OpenAlexafffund
Chen Wu, Michael Löw

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Radar Sonar & Navigation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicDirection-of-Arrival Estimation Techniques
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
FundersMinistère de la Défense Nationale
KeywordsComputer scienceSIGNAL (programming language)Direction of arrivalSensitivity (control systems)WidebandAcousticsRadarAlgorithmFrequency bandDirection findingBandwidth (computing)Cluster analysisSignal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Noise (video)Electronic engineeringPhysicsTelecommunicationsAntenna (radio)Artificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For weak signal detection with direction‐finding (DF), this article presents a new receiver design approach that combines our accumulatively increasing receiver sensitivity (AIRS) signal detection algorithm with the compressive‐sensing (CS)‐based DF‐array/algorithm. The former uses the concept of timeslot (TS)‐based signal threshold detection, whereas the latter employs a frequency‐independent array with randomly located elements, whose bandwidth (BW) largely determines the DF‐array BW. To estimate the direction of a signal, the AIRS algorithm generates the array steering vectors in each TS when the amplitude of any frequency bins exceeds the predetermined threshold of the TS. The aim of this paper is to demonstrate the ability of the new receiver to detect low probability of intercept radar signals with high DF accuracy, fine frequency resolution, and good time‐of‐arrival measurement resolution. To discriminate accurate emitter directions from many false estimations created by the DF‐array in very low signal‐to‐noise ratio environments, K‐means clustering was also applied. In a scenario, the frequency modulated signals from several 165‐mW X‐band radars were in the field of view of a 6‐element DF‐array. Simulation results show that the receiver can accurately estimate all the emitters' directions with root mean squared error of less than 1°, when the separation between the DF‐array and radars is about 100 km.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.920
Threshold uncertainty score0.884

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.262
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Radar Sonar & NavigationSame topicDirection-of-Arrival Estimation TechniquesFrench-language works237,207