Robust variability index CFAR for non‐homogeneous background

Radar signal detection using constant false alarm rate (CFAR) detectors encounters many non-ideal situations making it difficult to characterise the background. These include the presence of multiple targets, clutter edges and their combination in the reference window. Designing an efficient CFAR for these situations is a non-trivial problem. Algorithms based on ordered statistics (OS), outlier rejection using sorting and sample by sample hypothesis testing, variability index (VI), ordered data VI are proposed in the literature. These approaches require expensive sorting or prior information on the depth of censoring. In this study, the authors propose robust VI CFAR (RVI-CFAR) that obviates sorting. RVI-CFAR computes the threshold in multiple stages. The first stage uses VI-CFAR to determine an adaptive threshold. Outlier rejection in the computation of background, mean ratio (MR) and VI is carried out in subsequent stages. The updated MR and VI statistics are used to refine switching decisions at every stage of processing. RVI-CFAR exhibits low CFAR loss in homogeneous and multiple target scenarios, meanwhile achieving superior performance compared to other censored CFAR techniques. The proposed RVI-CFAR is evaluated and shown to be robust for all the cases of non-homogeneity compared to OS CFAR.

[1]  Pramod K. Varshney,et al.  Intelligent CFAR processor based on data variability , 2000, IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst..

[2]  M. Weiss,et al.  Analysis of Some Modified Cell-Averaging CFAR Processors in Multiple-Target Situations , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems.

[3]  M. B. El Mashade Analysis of the censored-mean level CFAR processor in multiple target and nonuniform clutter , 1995 .

[4]  V. Hansen,et al.  Detectability Loss Due to "Greatest Of" Selection in a Cell-Averaging CFAR , 1980, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems.

[5]  John Rickard,et al.  Adaptive Detection Algorithms for Multiple-Target Situations , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems.

[6]  James Ritcey,et al.  Performance Analysis of the Censored Mean-Level Detector , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems.

[7]  Mohamed B. El Mashade Heterogeneous performance evaluation of sophisticated versions of CFAR detection schemes , 2016 .

[8]  S. D. Himonas,et al.  Automatic censored CFAR detection for nonhomogeneous environments , 1992 .

[9]  M. Barkat,et al.  Automatic censoring CFAR detector based on ordered data variability for nonhomogeneous environments , 2005 .

[10]  S. D. Himonas Adaptive censored greatest-of CFAR detection , 1992 .

[11]  Ding Tao,et al.  Robust CFAR Detector Based on Truncated Statistics in Multiple-Target Situations , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[12]  G. Trunk Range Resolution of Targets Using Automatic Detectors , 1978, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems.

[13]  Junhao Xie,et al.  Modified cell averaging CFAR detector based on Grubbs criterion in non‐homogeneous background , 2019, IET Radar, Sonar & Navigation.

[14]  Pramod K. Varshney,et al.  CFAR detection for multiple target situations , 1989 .

[15]  Hermann Rohling,et al.  Radar CFAR Thresholding in Clutter and Multiple Target Situations , 1983, IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic Systems.

[16]  Gangyao Kuang,et al.  An Adaptive and Fast CFAR Algorithm Based on Automatic Censoring for Target Detection in High-Resolution SAR Images , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing.

[17]  Yoshio Yamaguchi,et al.  On the Iterative Censoring for Target Detection in SAR Images , 2011, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters.

[18]  Saleem A. Kassam,et al.  Analysis of CFAR processors in homogeneous background , 1988 .