Detection and Parameter Extraction of Low Probability of Intercept Radar Signals using the Hough Transform

Daniel L. Stevens; Stephanie A. Schuckers

Detection and Parameter Extraction of Low Probability of Intercept Radar Signals using the Hough Transform

Dr. Daniel L. Stevens * § Ph.D., B.S. in Electrical Engineering, M.S. in Physics

Contact

Stephanie A. Schuckers §

Contact

§ Air Force Research Laboratory, Rome, NY

Detection and Parameter Extraction of Low Probability of Intercept Radar Signals using the Hough Transform

Article Fingerprint

ReserarchID

X9860

Detection and Parameter Extraction of Low Probability of Intercept Radar Signals using the Hough Transform Banner

Key Research Insights

Synthesized scholarly intelligence & interactive research assistant

This converted HTML version may contain rendering inconsistencies. Please refer to the PDF for the authoritative version, or click here to provide feedback.

Abstract

Digital intercept receivers are currently moving away from Fourier-based analysis and towards classical time-frequency analysis techniques, such as the Wigner-Ville distribution, Choi-Williams distribution, spectrogram, and scalogram, for the purpose of analyzing low probability of intercept radar signals (e.g. triangular modulated frequency modulated continuous wave and frequency shift keying). Although these classical time-frequency techniques are an improvement over the Fourier-based analysis, they still suffer from a lack of readability, due to cross-term interference, and a mediocre performance in low SNR environments. This lack of readability may lead to inaccurate detection and parameter extraction of these radar signals. In this paper, the use of the Hough transform, because of its ability to suppress cross-term interference, separate signals from cross-terms, and perform well in the presence of noise, is proposed as an improved signal analysis technique. With these qualities, the Hough transform has the potential to produce better readability and consequently, more accurate signal detection and parameter extraction metrics.

References

35 Cites in Article

Reference Format

1. F Auger,P Flandrin (1995). Improving the Readability of Time-Frequency and Time-Scale Representations by the Reassignment Method. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 43(5), 1068-1089.
2. S Barbarossa,A Zanalda (1992). A Combined Wigner-Ville and Hough Transform for Cross-Terms Suppression and Optimal Detection and Parameter Estimation. ICASSP '92, 5, 173-176.
3. S Barbarossa (1995). Analysis of Multicomponent LFM Signals by a Combined Wigner-Hough Transform. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 43(6), 1511-1515.
4. Nicholas Bennett,Naoki Saito (2005). Using edge information in time–frequency representations for chirp parameter estimation. Applied and Computational Harmonic Analysis, 18(2), 186-197.
5. Boualem Boashash (2003). Preface to the First Edition. Time-Frequency Signal Analysis and Processing, xxxiii-xxxiv.
6. H-I Choi,W Williams (1989). Improved time-frequency representation of multicomponent signals using exponential kernels. IEEE Transactions on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 37(6), 862-871.
7. L Cirillo,A Zoubir,M Amin (2008). Parameter Estimation for Locally Linear FM Signals Using a Time-Frequency Hough Transform. IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, 56(9), 4162-4175.
8. L Cohen (2002). The Wavelet Transform and Time-Frequency Analysis. Wavelet Transforms and Signal Processing, 3-22.
9. L Cohen (1995). Time-Frequency Analysis. Time-Frequency Analysis, 10.
10. C De Luigi,E Moreau (2002). Wigner-Ville and Polynomial Wigner-Ville Transforms in the Estimation of Nonlinear FM Signal Parameters. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 2, 1433-1436.
11. P Flandrin,F Auger,E Chassande-Mottin (2003). Time-Frequency reassignment: From principles to algorithms. Applications in Time-Frequency Signal Processing, 12.
12. Lorenzo Galleani,Leon Cohen,Andrew Noga (2006). A time-frequency approach to the adjustable bandwidth concept. Digital Signal Processing, 16(5), 454-467.
13. F Geroleo (2009). Periodic Wigner-Ville Hough Transform for LFMCW Detection. Low Probability of Intercept ELINT/SIGINT Conference
14. Y Grishin,D Janczak (2007). Computer-Aided Methods of the LPI Radar Signal Detection and Classification.
15. C Guanghua,M Shiwei,Q Tinghao,W Jian,C Jialin (2008). The Wigner-Ville Distribution and the Cross Wigner-Ville Distribution of Noisy Signals. Journal of Systems Engineering and Electronics, 19(5), 1053-1057.
16. T Gulum (2007). Autonomous Non-Linear Classifications of LPI Radar Signal Modulations. Autonomous Non-Linear Classifications of LPI Radar Signal Modulations, 17.
17. T Gulum,P Pace,R Cristi (2008). Extraction of Polyphase Radar Modulation Parameters Using a Wigner-Ville Distribution-Radon Transform. IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing
18. F Hlawatsch,G Boudreaux-Bartels (1992). Linear and quadratic time-frequency signal representations. IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, 9(2), 21-67.
19. Iñigo Incer,Edit Kaminsky (2007). Performance of chirp-slope keying with joint time-frequency detectors.
20. F Auger,P Flandrin,P Goncalves,O Lemoine (1996). Time-Frequency Toolbox Users Manual. Time-Frequency Toolbox Users Manual, 21.
21. F Lari,A Zakhor (1992). Automatic classification of active sonar data using time-frequency transforms. [1992] Proceedings of the IEEE-SP International Symposium on Time-Frequency and Time-Scale Analysis, 21-24.
22. Y Liang,L Zhang,M Xing,Z Bao (2009). High-Speed Ground Moving Target Detection Research Using Triangular Modulation FMCW. Front. Electr. Electron. Eng., China, 4(2), 23.
23. P Milne,P Pace (2002). Wigner Distribution Detection and Analysis of FMCW and P-4 Polyphase LPI Waveforms. Proceedings of ICASSP, 3944-3947.
24. S Mitra (2002). Digital Signal Processing with Examples in MATLAB®, Second Edition. Digital Signal Processing with Examples in MATLAB®, Second Edition
25. D Nikolaev,S Karpenko,I Nikolayev (2008). Hough Transform: Underestimated Tool In The Computer Vision Field. ECMS 2008 Proceedings edited by: L. S. Louca, Y. Chrysanthou, Z. Oplatkova, K. Al-Begain, 238-243.
26. P Pace (2009). Detecting and Classifying Low Probability of Intercept Radar. Detecting and Classifying Low Probability of Intercept Radar, 27.
27. J Stephens (1996). Advances in Signal Processing Technology for Electronic Warfare. IEEE AES Systems Magazine, 31-38.
28. Neil Toronto,Bryan Morse,Dan Ventura,Kevin Seppi (2007). The Hough Transform's Implicit Bayesian Foundation. 2007 IEEE International Conference on Image Processing, 4, IV - 377-IV - 380.
29. T Upperman (1930). ELINT Signal Processing Using Choi-Williams Distribution on Reconfigurable Computers for Detection and Classification of LPI Emitters. ELINT Signal Processing Using Choi-Williams Distribution on Reconfigurable Computers for Detection and Classification of LPI Emitters
30. R Wiley (2006). ELINT: The Interception and Analysis of Radar Signals. ELINT: The Interception and Analysis of Radar Signals, 31.
31. William Williams,J Jeong (1992). Discrete Reduced Interference Distributions. Applications in Time-Frequency Signal Processing, 273-306.
32. K Wong,T Davidson,S Abelkader (2009). Detection of Low Probability of Intercept Radar Signals. Detection of Low Probability of Intercept Radar Signals, 33.
33. C Xie,K Zhang,K Feng,C Guo,J Xu (2008). Target Detecting Based on Improved WVD-HT for Radio Frequency Interference to UWB-SAR. First International Conference on Intelligent Networks and Intelligent Systems, 34.
34. A Yasotharan,T Thayaparan (1935). Optimum Time-Frequency Distribution for Detecting a Discrete-Time Chirp Signal in Noise. IEE Proc.-Vis. Image Signal Process, 153(2), 132-140.
35. J Zaino,R Bassett (1999). Adaptive Beamformer Example. RAAC, 225-272.

Download References

Funding

No external funding was declared for this work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

No ethics committee approval was required for this article type.

Data Availability

Not applicable for this article.

How to Cite This Article

Dr. Daniel L. Stevens, Stephanie A. Schuckers. 2016. "Detection and Parameter Extraction of Low Probability of Intercept Radar Signals using the Hough Transform". Global Journal of Research in Engineering - J: General Engineering GJRE-J Volume 15 (GJRE Volume 15 Issue J6).

More Citation Formats

Select Citation Style:

Download Citation

GJRE Volume 15 Issue J6

Explore Journals Explore Volume Read This Issue

Journal Specifications

Crossref Journal DOI 10.17406/gjre

Print ISSN 0975-5861

e-ISSN 2249-4596

Keywords

Not Found

Classification

GJRE-J Classification FOR Code: 090609

Submission ReceivedFebruary 10, 2015
Peer Review Double Blind
Handling Editor
Accepted March 1, 2015
Published March 15, 2015

Version of record

v1.2

Issue date

January 17, 2016

Language

English

Order Article Reprint

Experience in AR

Explore published articles in an immersive Augmented Reality environment. Our platform converts research papers into interactive 3D books, allowing readers to view and interact with content using AR and VR compatible devices.

View in VR

Read in 3D

Your published article is automatically converted into a realistic 3D book. Flip through pages and read research papers in a more engaging and interactive format.

View in 3D

Article Matrices

Total Score: 132

Country: United States

Subject: Global Journal of Research in Engineering - J: General Engineering

Authors: Daniel L. Stevens, Stephanie A. Schuckers (PhD/Dr. count: 0)

View Count (all-time): 19

Total Views (Real + Logic): 1406

Total Downloads (simulated): 96

Publish Date: 2015 03, Sun

Monthly Totals (Real + Logic):

Month 1: 41 views
Month 2: 42 views
Month 3: 53 views
Month 4: 42 views
Month 5: 50 views
Month 6: 49 views
Month 7: 28 views
Month 8: 33 views
Month 9: 40 views
Month 10: 54 views
Month 11: 38 views
Month 12: 45 views
Month 13: 34 views
Month 14: 30 views
Month 15: 29 views
Month 16: 21 views
Month 17: 30 views
Month 18: 36 views
Month 19: 41 views
Month 20: 24 views
Month 21: 32 views
Month 22: 22 views
Month 23: 32 views
Month 24: 29 views
Month 25: 23 views
Month 26: 25 views
Month 27: 20 views
Month 28: 18 views
Month 29: 17 views
Month 30: 22 views
Month 31: 39 views
Month 32: 25 views
Month 33: 27 views
Month 34: 32 views
Month 35: 30 views
Month 36: 34 views
Month 37: 33 views
Month 38: 37 views
Month 39: 15 views
Month 40: 24 views
Month 41: 24 views
Month 42: 22 views
Month 43: 32 views
Month 44: 19 views
Month 45: 27 views
Month 46: 34 views
Month 47: 24 views
Month 48: 34 views
Month 49: 38 views
Month 50: 45 views
Month 51: 22 views
Month 52: 15 views
Month 53: 44 views
Month 54: 29 views
Month 55: 22 views
Month 56: 41 views
Month 57: 26 views
Month 58: 31 views
Month 59: 37 views
Month 60: 18 views
Month 61: 31 views
Month 62: 49 views
Month 63: 30 views
Month 64: 35 views
Month 65: 43 views
Month 66: 34 views
Month 67: 26 views
Month 68: 29 views
Month 69: 36 views
Month 70: 38 views
Month 71: 29 views
Month 72: 35 views
Month 73: 33 views
Month 74: 31 views
Month 75: 34 views
Month 76: 18 views
Month 77: 30 views
Month 78: 38 views
Month 79: 40 views
Month 80: 44 views
Month 81: 40 views
Month 82: 40 views
Month 83: 27 views
Month 84: 45 views
Month 85: 26 views
Month 86: 29 views
Month 87: 27 views
Month 88: 11 views
Month 89: 39 views
Month 90: 28 views
Month 91: 28 views
Month 92: 31 views
Month 93: 29 views
Month 94: 13 views
Month 95: 29 views
Month 96: 20 views
Month 97: 22 views
Month 98: 37 views
Month 99: 31 views
Month 100: 49 views
Month 101: 27 views
Month 102: 26 views
Month 103: 46 views
Month 104: 25 views
Month 105: 27 views
Month 106: 41 views
Month 107: 45 views
Month 108: 27 views
Month 109: 20 views
Month 110: 18 views
Month 111: 35 views
Month 112: 38 views
Month 113: 28 views
Month 114: 32 views
Month 115: 22 views
Month 116: 34 views
Month 117: 34 views
Month 118: 39 views
Month 119: 33 views
Month 120: 21 views
Month 121: 33 views
Month 122: 57 views
Month 123: 48 views
Month 124: 41 views
Month 125: 57 views
Month 126: 30 views
Month 127: 42 views
Month 128: 26 views
Month 129: 29 views
Month 130: 36 views
Month 131: 35 views
Month 132: 39 views
Month 133: 28 views
Month 134: 35 views
Month 135: 29 views
Month 136: 28 views
Month 137: 47 views
Month 138: 57 views
Month 139: 53 views
Month 140: 27 views

Total Views: 1.4K

Total Downloads: 96

All Trends