2005
DOI: 10.1117/12.603831
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Assessment of down-looking GPR sensors for landmine detection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An existing SCR metric developed at the Institute for Defense Analyses specifically for GPR data, KSUM [7], is effective at providing this information. KSUM is a dimensionless metric that provides a value for each GPR A-scan.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An existing SCR metric developed at the Institute for Defense Analyses specifically for GPR data, KSUM [7], is effective at providing this information. KSUM is a dimensionless metric that provides a value for each GPR A-scan.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The latter avoid the interaction with the soil, but the strong obscuring clutter (due to impedance mismatch at the rough air-soil interface) greatly compromises the detection of buried targets. GPR systems can also be classified as Forward-Looking GPR (FLGPR) [4] and Down-Looking GPR (DLGPR) [5]. In vehicle mounted FLGPR systems, the antennas look ahead of a vehicle, with an angle of incidence that helps to maximize TM (Transverse Magnetic) waves penetration into the soil and/or to minimize reflections from the air-soil interface backscattered to the receiver.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the former, the antennas look ahead of the vehicle, reducing reflections from the ground surface at the expense of a lower resolution [3]. In the latter, the antennas are perpendicular to the soil, achieving high resolution but suffering from strong specular reflections [4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%