MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416155286 · doi:10.1063/5.0292890

The imaging algorithm in the optimal range FrFT domain based on Doppler parameters

2025· article· en· W4416155286 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Zhenli Wang, Yulong Xu, J. Y. Liu, Guangliang Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueAIP Advances · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced SAR Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsDoppler effectEnergy (signal processing)Range (aeronautics)Fourier transformRotation (mathematics)Frequency domainEstimation theory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In view of the error impact of Doppler parameters estimation on SAR imaging performance, this paper constructs the energy focusing axis based on the optimal rotation angle in the optimal range FrFT (fractional Fourier transform) domain. On this basis, the relationship among Doppler center frequency, Doppler FM (frequency modulation) rate, and energy focusing axis, as well as the relationship between Doppler center frequency and Doppler FM rate are derived in detail, and then, the basic framework of the D-FrFT-RD algorithm was constructed. The imaging test of Canadian spaceborne RADARSAT-1 measured data shows that when the error of Doppler center frequency estimation gradually increases from 0% to 5%, the energy focusing axis curve may deviate from the normalized value to some extent, but in reality, the impact on SAR imaging performance parameters is not significant. Compared to the traditional RD (range Doppler) algorithm, the energy focusing axis curve corresponding to the D-FrFT-RD algorithm in this paper is relatively stable, with high range resolution, and varying degrees of improvement in both range PSLR and range ISLR.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIP AdvancesSame topicAdvanced SAR Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207