A New Extended Target Detection Method Based on the Maximum Eigenvalue of the Hermitian Matrix

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

this paper proposes a maximum eigenvalue detector based on sliding window matrix covariance matrix to solve the problem of non-stationary, non-uniform and low signal-to-noise ratio target detection. The corresponding Hermitian-covariance matrix is constructed by using the sliding window block, and its maximum eigenvalue is used as the test statistic.

 My comments are listed below:

(1)    In figure 3, X-label and Y- label is too small to see clearly.

(2)    What is the specific application scenarios of the proposed algorithm?

(3)    The proposed algorithm didn’t compared with the state of the art algorithm, so the performance of the algorithm is hard to evaluate.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments and professional advice. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request, we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Meanwhile, We hope that our work can be improved again. Furthermore, we would like to show the details in Annex.

In conclusion, thank you for your valuable feedback on my paper, thank you very much for your attention and time. Look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Yong Xu

16 Apr.,2024

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

This article deals with the enhancement of the signal-to-clutter ratio in radar target detection. The article only needs a few minor improvements. 

Does p² "number of sample points" on line 202 correspond to p² "degrees of freedom" in line 210?

The limitations of the paper should be better emphasized as the experiments are based on several assumptions regarding H0 and H1.

I would also recommend to present in the conclusion other scenarios for testing the presented approach for SCR enhancement  similar to content within lines 416-421

Reference to line 318: "sliding window can separate the clutter and the target well".

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments and professional advice. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request, we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Meanwhile, We hope that our work can be improved again. Furthermore, we would like to show the details in Annex.

In conclusion, thank you for your valuable feedback on my paper, thank you very much for your attention and time. Look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Yong Xu

16 Apr.,2024

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Conventional waveforms process the target without considering the spatial response of the overall figure of the target and extended waveforms are applied to objects that are fairly larger than the range resolution by enhancing the signature through the most significant eigenvalue of the Hermitian matrix. However, the experimental part of the manuscript was not comprehensive enough to highlight the superiority of the proposed method. It is hoped that the authors will make further improvements to the manuscript. Here are my specific comments:

1.       Missing symbols in Ln:260, Eq.36 ect.

2.      Ln Ln145- 149-155 mentioned pulse compression operations. However, the equation doesn’t specify the operation definition and lacks progressive derivations associated with prior equation notations.

3.       1.       Ln 149-155 mentioned IDFT. Please derive the operation from the definition with progressive steps and associate the prior signal notations with the final conclusive equation for a clear path to trace.

4. Other research in related fields also studies extended waveform for target detection enhancement through eigenvalue analysis. Please do a broader literature review to analyze the prior studies in the discussion to highlight the innovation in this research.

Avoid the first-person position, such as 'we', or 'they' in technical writing, such as in ln 429, 447, etc. Third-person singular or past tense is preferred. Please revise accordingly.

Author Response

Dear reviewer,

Thank you very much for your comments and professional advice. These opinions help to improve academic rigor of our article. Based on your suggestion and request, we have made corrected modifications on the revised manuscript. Meanwhile, We hope that our work can be improved again. Furthermore, we would like to show the details in Annex.

In conclusion, thank you for your valuable feedback on my paper, thank you very much for your attention and time. Look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Yong Xu

16 Apr.,2024

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 3 Report

Thank you for the clarification and improvement. The paper is qualified to be published in my opinion.