The present invention relates, in general, to radar identification and, more specifically, to sorting signals received from multiple emitters into data clusters for pattern recognition.
Radars emit a variety of signals that may characterize and identify them. Each radar may emit a specific pulse amplitude and a specific fixed radio frequency (RF) or a variable RF ranging over a fixed bandwidth. Each may emit a fixed pulse repetition frequency (PRF) or pulse repetition interval (PRI) and may be of a certain pulse width (PW).
An aircraft flying into a region with an onboard wideband receiver may detect a variety of signals emitted from multiple radars located in that region. Unless these signals are sorted and separated from each other, it is not possible for the aircraft to determine the types of classes of radars it is about to encounter. It does not know whether the radars are hostile and does not know whether the radars present a high or low threat to the incoming aircraft.
A need, therefore, exists for an aircraft to be able to sort and identify the variety of radars that are emitting energy towards the aircraft. The present invention addresses this need.
To meet this and other needs, and in view of its purposes, the present invention provides a method of classifying radar emitters including the steps of: (a) receiving a plurality of signals from the radar emitters; (b) generating data components for each signal received from the radar emitters; (c) forming multi-dimensional samples using the generated data components; and (d) sorting the multi-dimensional samples into a plurality of data clusters, based on their respective proximity to the data clusters, each data cluster representing a classification of a radar emitter. Step (b) includes generating pulse data descriptors (PDWs) during a predetermined interval of time, and generating at least radio frequency (RF) data and pulse width (PW) data for the PDWs.
In another embodiment, the invention provides a system for classifying radar emitters including a receiver for receiving a plurality of signals from the radar emitters, and a processor coupled to the receiver, for (a) generating data components for each signal received from the radar emitters, (b) forming multi-dimensional samples from the generated data components; and (c) sorting the multi-dimensional samples into a plurality of data clusters, based on their respective proximity to the data clusters, each data cluster representing a classification of a radar emitter.
The processor may also assign a multi-dimensional sample to a data cluster, based on a Euclidean distance between the multi-dimensional sample and a center of the data cluster. The center of the data cluster may be formed as a mean vector of a set of multi-dimensional samples assigned to the data cluster.
In yet another embodiment, the invention provides a machine readable storage medium containing a set of instructions for a computer. The set of instructions implements the following steps: (a) processing a plurality of signals received from a receiver; (b) generating data components for each signal received from the receiver; (c) forming multi-dimensional samples using the generated data components; and (d) sorting the multi-dimensional samples into a plurality of data clusters, based on their respective proximity to the data clusters, each data cluster representing a classification of a radar emitter. Step (d) may include sorting the multi-dimensional samples using an ISODATA (iterative self-organizing data analysis technique) computer algorithm.
It is understood that the foregoing general description and the following detailed description are exemplary, but are not restrictive, of the invention.
The invention is best understood from the following detailed description when read in connection with the accompanying drawing. Included in the drawing are the following figures:
The present invention provides an unsupervised iterative classification method for radar pattern recognition. The method is self-organizing and requires minimal input from human interaction.
The method of the invention forms clusters from a set of input data (samples), where each cluster consists of very similar data (samples). The method first defines a measure of pattern similarity and establishes a rule for assigning individual samples to the domain of a specific cluster center. The invention uses the Euclidean distance between two data points x and z,
D=∥x−z∥
as a measure of pattern similarity. The smaller the distance, D, the greater is the similarity between x and z.
After a measure of pattern similarity is selected, the method of the invention sorts (or partitions) samples into cluster domains. The Euclidean distance measure, D, lends itself to this procedure, because it is a good measure of proximity. However, because the proximity of two patterns is a relative measure of similarity, it is necessary for the invention to establish a threshold to define degrees of acceptable similarity for the clustering method.
A performance-index is chosen to measure the degrees of similarity and a procedure is used which minimizes the chosen performance index. One such performance index is the sum of the squared errors resulting from the cluster, and is a proximity measure given by
where Nc is the number of cluster domains (or simply clusters), Sj is the set of samples belonging to the jth domain, and
is the sample mean vector of set Sj, with Nj representing the sample size of Sj.
There are other performance indices used in the method of clustering the samples, such as: (1) average squared distances between samples in a cluster domain, (2) average squared distances between samples in different cluster domains, (3) indices based on a scatter matrix and (4) minimum and maximum variance indices.
An embodiment of the invention will now be described based on an algorithm referred to as Iterative Self Organizing Data Analysis Techniques (ISODATA), which is disclosed by J. T. Tou and R. C. Gonzalez, Pattern Recognition Principles, Addison-Wesley, 1974, Chapter 3, pp. 75–109. The ISODATA algorithm, generally designated as 10, is also shown in
For a set of N samples, {x1, x2, . . . , xN}, ISODATA clustering algorithm includes the following steps:
Step 1: Specify various clustering parameters, as follows:
Step 2: Distribute the N samples among the present cluster centers, using the following relationship:
xεSjif∥x−zj∥≦∥x−zi∥,i=1,2, . . . , Nc; i≠:j
for all x in the sample set. In this notation, Sj represents the subset of samples assigned to the cluster center zj.
Step 3: Discard sample sets with fewer than ON members. That is, if for any j, Nj<θN, discard Sj and reduce Nc by 1.
Step 4: Update each cluster center zj, j=1,2, . . . , Nc, by setting it equal to the sample mean of its members (Sj), as follows:
where Nj is the number of samples in Sj.
Step 5: Compute the average distance Dj of samples in cluster domain Sj from their corresponding cluster center, using the following relationship:
Step 6: Compute the overall average distance of the samples from their respective cluster centers, using the following relationship:
Step 7: The following decisions are then made:
Step 8: Find the standard deviation vector σj=(σij, σ2j, . . . , σnj)′ for each sample subset, using the following relationship:
where n is the sample dimensionality, xik is the ith component of the kth sample in Sj; zij is the ith component of zj, and Nj is the number of sample in Sj. Each component of σj represents the standard deviation of the samples in Sj along a principal coordinate axis.
Step 9: Find the maximum component of each σj, j=1,2, . . . , Nc and denote it by σjmax.
Step 10: If for any σjmax, j=1,2, . . . , Nc, there are σjmax>θS, and
Cluster center zj+ is formed by adding a given quantity γj to the component zj which corresponds to the maximum component of σj, (σjmax). Similarly, zj− is formed by subtracting yj from the same component of zj. One way of specifying yj is to let it be equal to a fraction of σjmax, that is γj=kσjmax with 0<k<1.
If splitting took place in this step, then go to Step 2; otherwise continue.
Step 11: Compute the pairwise distances Dij between all cluster centers, as follows:
Dij=∥zi−zj∥, i=1,2, . . . , Nc−1;j=i+1, . . . , Nc
Step 12: Compare the distances Dij against the parameter θC. Arrange the L smallest distances which are less than θC in ascending order, as follows:
[Di1j1,Di2j2, . . . , DiLjL]
where Di1j1<Di2j2< . . . <DijL and L is the maximum number of pairs of cluster centers which may be lumped together. The lumping process is described below in Step 13.
Step 13: With each distance Dikjk, there is associated a pair of cluster centers Zk and Zk. Starting with the smallest of these distances, perform a pairwise lumping operation, according to the following relationship:
For k=1, 2, . . . , L, if neither Zik nor Zjk has been used in lumping during this iteration, merge these two cluster centers, using the following relationship:
Delete Zik and Zjk and reduce Nc by 1.
It is noted that only pairwise lumping is allowed and that a lumped cluster center may be obtained by weighting each old cluster by the number of samples in its domain. It will be understood that since a cluster center can only be lumped once, this step may not always result in L lumped centers.
Step 14: If this is the last iteration, the algorithm terminates. Otherwise, go to Step 1 if any of the process parameters requires changing at the user's discretion, or go to Step 2 if the parameters are to remain the same for the next iteration. An iteration is counted every time the procedure returns to Step 1 or 2.
Based on a flowchart of the ISODATA algorithm, illustrated in
A listing of the MATLAB program for clustering radar data samples is provided in the following tables.
Table A, threat_gen_n.m, lists a program for generating a snapshot of the radars' pulse descriptive words (PDWs). The snapshot includes PDW mixes from multiple radar threats, as they may be intercepted by wideband receiver 21, as shown in
Each PDW, which is a vector, is composed of four components, describing an intercepted radar pulse, as follows: (1) time of intercept (or arrival), TOA, (2) radio frequency, RF, (3) pulse width, PW, and (4) pulse amplitude, PA. It will be appreciated that in other embodiments of the present invention, less or more than four components (dimensions) of each PDW may be selected. For example, other components may be pulse repetition interval (PRI), modulation type, etc.
Referring to
Each raw PDW is normalized by module 23 of system 20, using the following relationship:
PDWNor=[PDWRaw−PDWAve]/STDPDW
where PDWNor is the individual normalized PDW vector, PDWraw is the individual PDW as intercepted by wideband receiver 21, PDWAve is the average PDW vector of the entire snapshot, and STDPDW is the standard deviation vector calculated from PDWRaw and PDWAve.
Table B, threat.m, lists a MATLAB function called by threat_gen_n.m to generate the PDWs.
Table 1, isodata_n.m, is the main program, which executes Step 1, Step 7 and Step 14 of the ISODATA algorithm, executed by module 24 of
The Euclidean distance, Dij, between PDWs (PDWi and PDWj) is calculated as follows:
Dij=w1(RFi−RFj)2+w2(PWi−PWj)2
where (RFi, PWi)and (RFj, PWj) represent PDWi and PDWj, respectively. Two weights, w1 and w2 are used, as an example, to adjust the relative size of the cluster (or equivalently, the pairwise distance between cluster centers) to be generated in ISODATA. The relative size may be adjusted as a function of the overall frequency and pulse width deviations, which likely are related to the number of input radar threats of the input snapshot, or may be adjusted as a function of dedicated frequency bands in which advanced emitters may reside and need to be clustered into a specific cluster size.
Referring to Table 1, six weights are listed (w1−w6). All weights are set to zero, except w3 and w4, which are RF frequency and pulse width, respectively. It will also be appreciated that initially at the start of the ISODATA algorithm, the number of clusters may be assumed to be 1. Samples to far away from a center of this original cluster may then be dropped from the cluster and a new cluster may be formed from the dropped samples.
Table 3, step3.m, lists the program to perform ISODATA Step 3.
Table 4, step4.m, lists the program to perform ISODATA Step 4.
Table 5, step5.m, lists the program to perform ISODATA Step 5.
Table 6, step6.m, lists the program to perform ISODATA Step 6.
(Table 7 is skipped for convenience of numbering the tables so that they correspond to the numbered IDODATA steps.)
Table 8, step8.m, lists the program to perform ISODATA Step 8.
Table 9, step9.m, lists the program to perform ISODATA Step 9.
Table 10, step10.m, lists the program to perform ISODATA Step 10.
Table 11, step11.m, lists the program to perform ISODATA Step 11.
Table 12, step12.m, lists the program to perform ISODATA Step 12 and Step 13.
To illustrate the operation of the invention, a simple test case of an electronic warfare (EW) scenario consisting of five (5) radar threats was provided to a simulation of system 20. The five radar threats and their characteristics are listed in Table 13.
Snapshots of PDWs of this EW scenario were generated by the program threat generator listed in Table A.
Performance of system 20 in clustering and classifying the five radar threats is summarized in
It will be appreciated that system 20 may be used to cluster EW scenarios consisting of mixes of stable radars and advanced radars, such as dwell switched and frequency agile radars.
It will also be appreciated that to cluster advanced emitters having frequency agility capability, the weighs (w1, w2, and others, if necessary) used in Euclidean distance calculations between PDWs may be made adaptive, so that PDWs from different threats may be sorted into different clusters and PDWs from the same threat will not be partitioned into multiple clusters. As an example, the weights may be made a function of the operational frequency band of the radar emitter and the size of clusters generated may be adjusted to prevent threat splitting.
Although illustrated and described herein with reference to certain specific embodiments, the present invention is nevertheless not intended to be limited to the details shown. Rather, various modifications may be made in the details within the scope and range of equivalents of the claims and without departing from the spirit of the invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4679050 | Bergman | Jul 1987 | A |
4918455 | Maier | Apr 1990 | A |
5381150 | Hawkins et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5583505 | Andersen et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
6337654 | Richardson et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6437728 | Richardson et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6940450 | Blunt et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |