SVM and Greedy GMM Applied on Target Identification

Yessad, Dalila; Amrouche, Abderrahmane; Debyeche, Mohamed

doi:10.1007/978-3-642-24958-7_34

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The GMM densities have the advantage that they can better describe the distribution shape of various multi-modal measurement data. In [58], [59], GMM are used for radar target identification using echo data. Adopting a similar approach, we will model the UAV RCS class densities using GMM.…”

Section: B Multimodal Uav Rcs Statistical Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Analysis of Radar Cross Section Based UAV Classification Techniques

Ezuma¹,

Anjinappa²,

Semkin³

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work investigates the problem of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) identification using their radar crosssection (RCS) signature. The RCS of six commercial UAVs are measured at 15 GHz and 25 GHz in an anechoic chamber, for both vertical-vertical and horizontal-horizontal polarization. The RCS signatures are used to train 15 different classification algorithms, each belonging to one of three different categories: statistical learning (SL), machine learning (ML), and deep learning (DL). The study shows that while the classification accuracy of all the algorithms increases with the signal-tonoise ratio (SNR), the ML algorithm achieved better accuracy than the SL and DL algorithms. For example, the classification tree ML achieves an accuracy of 98.66% at 3 dB SNR using the 15 GHz VV-polarized RCS test data from the UAVs. We investigate the classification accuracy using Monte Carlo analysis with the aid of boxplots, confusion matrices, and classification plots. On average, the accuracy of the classification tree ML model performed better than the other algorithms, followed by the Peter Swerling statistical models and the discriminant analysis ML model. In general, the classification accuracy of the ML and SL algorithms outperformed the DL algorithms (Squeezenet, Googlenet, Nasnet, and Resnet 101) considered in the study. Furthermore, the computational time of each algorithm is analyzed. The study concludes that while the SL algorithms achieved good classification accuracy, the computational time was relatively long when compared to the ML and DL algorithms. Also, the study shows that the classification tree achieved the fastest average classification time of about 0.46 ms.

show abstract

Section: B Multimodal Uav Rcs Statistical Distributionmentioning

confidence: 99%