Space/time/frequency methods in adaptive radar - New Jersey ...

89Figure 5.4 CSNR vs Rank order for other techniques with large clutter fieldmethods. With the jammers included, the number of principal components used togenerate the results shown in Figure 5.5(b) was p = 6 for the eigencanceler and CSM,p = 7 for the DFT, and p = 8 for the DCT. In both cases, the highest CSNR's areexhibited by the CSM and eigencanceler methods, with reduced-rank MVB based onthe DCT and DFT providing slightly lower performance. All reduced-rank methodsclearly outperform the full-rank SMI.As shown in section 4.2.1, the DCT and the DFT reduced-rank CSNR, Pr, havea beta distribution. The simulated CSNR of the DCT and the DFT reduced rankcases may be compared to the theoretical CSNR using Equation 4.20. In Figure 5.6,the simulated and theoretical CSNR results for both the DCT and DFT are shown.There is good agreement between the theoretical results and the simulationsFigure 5.7 shows the average probability of detection. To compute the probabilityof detection, we make the assumption that the target amplitude a in Equation3.2 is a zero-mean, circularly symmetric complex Gaussian random variable with