MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117668803 · doi:10.1109/tqe.2025.3649709

A Sparse-Event Simulation Engine to Model Coincidence-Based Ranging Architectures in Quantum Lidar

2025· article· en· W7117668803 on OpenAlexaff
Marco Passafiume, Raviraj Adve, Boniface Yogendran, Bhashyam Balaji

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicAdvanced Optical Sensing Technologies
Canadian institutionsDepartment of National DefenceDefence Research and Development CanadaUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLidarRangingNoise (video)Range (aeronautics)ComputationFunction (biology)PhotonFidelityRadar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-classical radar and lidar systems have received substantial interest recently; however, while the many experimental demonstrations have provided deep physical knowledge of such systems, there remains a lack of effective system models to obtain fundamental metrics such as range resolution as a function of system parameters. This work introduces a high-fidelity simulation platform to mimic a certain type of quantum radar, specifically a recently proposed one based on temporal coincidences that arise due to entanglement. Specifically, the system measures coincidences between events related to a reference source and those related to the back-scattering of photons from targets. The large number of events – and their complex interaction with system components – makes a realistic simulation challenging. As an initial assessment, in this paper we develop a simulator to estimate the expected point spread function (PSF), and thereby the range resolution, considering various coincidence window time widths and system non-idealities. The estimate is based on the numerical computation of the correlation between the reference traces shifted along the time domain and traces of back-scattered photons (along with noise photons). The simulated results are comparable to available experimental results, illustrating the fidelity of the simulation engine. A crucial result is that, unlike a classical radar, the PSF and range resolution depends upon the environmental noise and multiple system parameters, not just the transmitted waveform.

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)0.003
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 venueIEEE Transactions on Quantum EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Optical Sensing TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207