scholarly journals Counter-Interception and Counter-Exploitation Features of Noise Radar Technology

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (22) ◽  
pp. 4509
Author(s):  
Gaspare Galati ◽  
Gabriele Pavan ◽  
Kubilay Savci ◽  
Christoph Wasserzier

In defense applications, the main features of radars are the Low Probability of Intercept (LPI) and the Low Probability of Exploitation (LPE). The counterpart uses more and more capable intercept receivers and signal processors thanks to the ongoing technological progress. Noise Radar Technology (NRT) is probably a very effective answer to the increasing demand for operational LPI/LPE radars. The design and selection of the radiated waveforms, while respecting the prescribed spectrum occupancy, has to comply with the contrasting requirements of LPI/LPE and of a favorable shape of the ambiguity function. Information theory seems to be a “technologically agnostic” tool to attempt to quantify the LPI/LPE capability of noise waveforms with little, or absent, a priori knowledge of the means and the strategies used by the counterpart. An information theoretical analysis can lead to practical results in the design and selection of NRT waveforms.

Author(s):  
Maria A. Milkova

Nowadays the process of information accumulation is so rapid that the concept of the usual iterative search requires revision. Being in the world of oversaturated information in order to comprehensively cover and analyze the problem under study, it is necessary to make high demands on the search methods. An innovative approach to search should flexibly take into account the large amount of already accumulated knowledge and a priori requirements for results. The results, in turn, should immediately provide a roadmap of the direction being studied with the possibility of as much detail as possible. The approach to search based on topic modeling, the so-called topic search, allows you to take into account all these requirements and thereby streamline the nature of working with information, increase the efficiency of knowledge production, avoid cognitive biases in the perception of information, which is important both on micro and macro level. In order to demonstrate an example of applying topic search, the article considers the task of analyzing an import substitution program based on patent data. The program includes plans for 22 industries and contains more than 1,500 products and technologies for the proposed import substitution. The use of patent search based on topic modeling allows to search immediately by the blocks of a priori information – terms of industrial plans for import substitution and at the output get a selection of relevant documents for each of the industries. This approach allows not only to provide a comprehensive picture of the effectiveness of the program as a whole, but also to visually obtain more detailed information about which groups of products and technologies have been patented.


Author(s):  
Robert Audi

This book provides an overall theory of perception and an account of knowledge and justification concerning the physical, the abstract, and the normative. It has the rigor appropriate for professionals but explains its main points using concrete examples. It accounts for two important aspects of perception on which philosophers have said too little: its relevance to a priori knowledge—traditionally conceived as independent of perception—and its role in human action. Overall, the book provides a full-scale account of perception, presents a theory of the a priori, and explains how perception guides action. It also clarifies the relation between action and practical reasoning; the notion of rational action; and the relation between propositional and practical knowledge. Part One develops a theory of perception as experiential, representational, and causally connected with its objects: as a discriminative response to those objects, embodying phenomenally distinctive elements; and as yielding rich information that underlies human knowledge. Part Two presents a theory of self-evidence and the a priori. The theory is perceptualist in explicating the apprehension of a priori truths by articulating its parallels to perception. The theory unifies empirical and a priori knowledge by clarifying their reliable connections with their objects—connections many have thought impossible for a priori knowledge as about the abstract. Part Three explores how perception guides action; the relation between knowing how and knowing that; the nature of reasons for action; the role of inference in determining action; and the overall conditions for rational action.


Author(s):  
Donald C. Williams

This chapter begins with a systematic presentation of the doctrine of actualism. According to actualism, all that exists is actual, determinate, and of one way of being. There are no possible objects, nor is there any indeterminacy in the world. In addition, there are no ways of being. It is proposed that actual entities stand in three fundamental relations: mereological, spatiotemporal, and resemblance relations. These relations govern the fundamental entities. Each fundamental entity stands in parthood relations, spatiotemporal relations, and resemblance relations to other entities. The resulting picture is one that represents the world as a four-dimensional manifold of actual ‘qualitied contents’—upon which all else supervenes. It is then explained how actualism accounts for classes, quantity, number, causation, laws, a priori knowledge, necessity, and induction.


Author(s):  
Keith DeRose

In this chapter the contextualist Moorean account of how we know by ordinary standards that we are not brains in vats (BIVs) utilized in Chapter 1 is developed and defended, and the picture of knowledge and justification that emerges is explained. The account (a) is based on a double-safety picture of knowledge; (b) has it that our knowledge that we’re not BIVs is in an important way a priori; and (c) is knowledge that is easily obtained, without any need for fancy philosophical arguments to the effect that we’re not BIVs; and the account is one that (d) utilizes a conservative approach to epistemic justification. Special attention is devoted to defending the claim that we have a priori knowledge of the deeply contingent fact that we’re not BIVs, and to distinguishing this a prioritist account of this knowledge from the kind of “dogmatist” account prominently championed by James Pryor.


Author(s):  
Laure Fournier ◽  
Lena Costaridou ◽  
Luc Bidaut ◽  
Nicolas Michoux ◽  
Frederic E. Lecouvet ◽  
...  

Abstract Existing quantitative imaging biomarkers (QIBs) are associated with known biological tissue characteristics and follow a well-understood path of technical, biological and clinical validation before incorporation into clinical trials. In radiomics, novel data-driven processes extract numerous visually imperceptible statistical features from the imaging data with no a priori assumptions on their correlation with biological processes. The selection of relevant features (radiomic signature) and incorporation into clinical trials therefore requires additional considerations to ensure meaningful imaging endpoints. Also, the number of radiomic features tested means that power calculations would result in sample sizes impossible to achieve within clinical trials. This article examines how the process of standardising and validating data-driven imaging biomarkers differs from those based on biological associations. Radiomic signatures are best developed initially on datasets that represent diversity of acquisition protocols as well as diversity of disease and of normal findings, rather than within clinical trials with standardised and optimised protocols as this would risk the selection of radiomic features being linked to the imaging process rather than the pathology. Normalisation through discretisation and feature harmonisation are essential pre-processing steps. Biological correlation may be performed after the technical and clinical validity of a radiomic signature is established, but is not mandatory. Feature selection may be part of discovery within a radiomics-specific trial or represent exploratory endpoints within an established trial; a previously validated radiomic signature may even be used as a primary/secondary endpoint, particularly if associations are demonstrated with specific biological processes and pathways being targeted within clinical trials. Key Points • Data-driven processes like radiomics risk false discoveries due to high-dimensionality of the dataset compared to sample size, making adequate diversity of the data, cross-validation and external validation essential to mitigate the risks of spurious associations and overfitting. • Use of radiomic signatures within clinical trials requires multistep standardisation of image acquisition, image analysis and data mining processes. • Biological correlation may be established after clinical validation but is not mandatory.


1995 ◽  
Vol 31 (22) ◽  
pp. 1930-1931 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Anguita ◽  
S. Rovetta ◽  
S. Ridella ◽  
R. Zunino

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document