Distinguished Lecturer and Tutorial Program

All AESS Chapters and IEEE Sections are encouraged to take advantage of the AESS Distinguished Lecturer and Tutorial Program for their regular or special meetings. We have selected an outstanding list of speakers who are experts in their fields. The AES Society will pay reasonable speaker’s expenses for economy-class travel, lodging and meals. As a general guideline, speaker’s expenses involving travel wholly within North America or within the European Union will be covered up to $1,000. Expenses involving extensive international travel will be covered up to $2,000. The Society encourages arrangements whereby more than one lecture is presented in a single trip, and costs in such situations will be considered on a case by case basis.  The inviting organization is expected to cover 50% of the speaker’s expenses.

The procedure for obtaining a speaker is as follows: If a Chapter or Section has an interest in inviting one of the speakers, it should first contact the speaker directly in order to obtain his or her agreement to give the lecture on a particular date. After this is accomplished, the Chapter or Section must notify the AESS VP for Education by sending in a DL Request Form. If financial support from the AESS is required for the speaker’s expenses, he or she must submit an estimate to the AESS VP for Education before actually incurring any expenses. This estimate must be provided at least 45 days before the planned meeting to provide time for feedback from the VP for Education and for changes if needed. The VP for Education must provide written authorization to proceed.

Distinguished Lecturers and Tutorial speakers are ambassadors of the AESS. As such, they should take advantage of the opportunity to stimulate membership in IEEE and AESS in particular. To support this goal, the Society has prepared a short presentation on the benefits of Society membership. Speakers should contact Judy Scharmann well in advance of each lecture to arrange for shipping AESS and IEEE Membership brochures and back copies of Society Publications to hand out.

After giving a lecture, the speaker and/or host should prepare a short report suitable for publication in Systems Magazine and posting on the AESS web site. Pictures taken at the meeting are highly desirable.

Go to Past DL Reports

Jr. Past President; N&A Committee Chair (2014-2015); AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016); IEEE Fellow


Lecture Title: Synthetic Aperture Radar

The techniques of aperture synthesis have their origins in radioastronomy, and Ryle and Hewish were awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics for their work in this field. At much the same time (the early1950s) it had also been realized that the cross-range resolution of a sideways-looking airborne radar (SLAR) could be improved by filtering (a technique known as Doppler beam-sharpening). These ideas were pursued and developed at the University of Illinois, and at the Willow Run Laboratory of the University of Michigan (the forerunner of the Environmental Research Institute of Michigan - ERIM). Since then numerous laboratories and organisations have built and operated SAR systems. Of course, before the advent of fast digital computers, the processing of the raw data to form the images had to be done by analogue processing - usually optically. Nowadays digital processing is almost universally used, and real-time processing is relatively straightforward.

The first spaceborne SAR system was carried by NASA's SEASAT satellite in 1978. This only lasted for 3 months, when a massive power supply fault cut short its life. Nevertheless, this provided a wealth of data (much of which still remains to be properly analysed), and demonstrated the value of spaceborne SAR for a wide variety of applications in environmental monitoring. Subsequently NASA, the European Space Agency, Japan, Canada and several other Agencies have built and flown satellite SAR systems of increasing sophistication, now often with multiple frequency bands and polarimetric capability. In parallel, data interpretation techniques have progressed - indeed, it has been suggested that the extraction of quantitative information from SAR imagery represents the greatest current problem.

Aircraft-borne SAR is used both for remote sensing, and for high-resolution military surveillance. Resolution of the order of centimetres can be achieved with spotlight-mode operation, and target detection and recognition algorithms are being developed, as well as MTI to separate moving targets from stationary clutter. At such high resolution, characterisation and correction of motion errors becomes more and more important.

Interferometric SAR is currently a very active area of SAR research and development. The technique was first demonstrated with airborne SAR back in the 1970s, but subsequently it has been widely used with spaceborne SAR for high-resolution topographic mapping. With aircraft-borne systems there is the potential to recognise targets from their 3-D signatures.

Differential interferometry has demonstrated remarkable results in detecting changes in topography caused, for example, by earthquakes and volcanoes.

Finally, synthetic aperture techniques have also been applied in the field of sonar, to give high-resolution maps of the seabed, for applications such as the detection of wrecks, in the oil industry, and for the detection of mines. The principles are very similar, but the velocity of sound in water is very much slower (~1500m/s), which introduces certain problems, and the propagation of sound through water is strongly influenced by variations in temperature and salinity.

This lecture gives a subjective and selective overview of some current topics and results in modern synthetic aperture radar.

Lecture Title: Bistatic & Multistatic Radar

Bistatic and multistatic radar systems have been studied and built since the earliest days of radar. As an early example, the Germans used the British Chain Home radars as illuminators for their Klein Heidelberg bistatic system. Bistatic radars have some obvious advantages. The receiving systems are passive, and hence undetectable. The receiving systems are also potentially simple and cheap. Bistatic radar may also have a counter-stealth capability, since target shaping to reduce target monostatic RCS will in general not reduce the bistatic RCS.

Furthermore, bistatic radar systems can utilize VHF and UHF broadcast and communications signals as 'illuminators of opportunity', at which frequencies target stealth treatment is likely to be less effective.

Bistatic systems have some disadvantages. The geometry is more complicated than that of monostatic systems. It is necessary to provide some form of synchronization between transmitter and receiver, in respect of transmitter azimuth angle, instant of pulse transmission, and (for coherent processing) transmit signal phase. Receivers which use transmitters which scan in azimuth will probably have to utilize 'pulse chasing' processing.

Over the years a number of bistatic and multistatic radar systems have been built and evaluated. However, rather few have progressed beyond the 'technology demonstrator' phase. Willis, in his book Bistatic Radar, has remarked that interest in bistatic radar tends to vary on a period of approximately fifteen years, and that currently we are at a peak of that cycle. The purpose of this lecture is therefore to present a subjective review of the properties and current developments in the subject, with particular emphasis on 'passive coherent location' and to consider whether or not the present interest is just another peak in the cycle. It draws on material in the book Advances in Bistatic Radar, edited by Willis and Griffiths, and recently published by SciTech.

BoG 2015-2017; VP Conferences; AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016); IEEE Fellow


Lecture Title: Foliage Penetration Radar

Foliage Penetration (FOPEN) Radar is a technical approach to find and characterize man-made objections under dense foliage, as well as characterizing the foliage itself. It has applications in both military surveillance and civilian geospatial imaging. This Tutorial is divided into three parts.

• The early history of FOPEN Radar: battlefield surveillance and the early experiments in foliage penetration radar are covered. There were some very interesting developments in radar technology that enabled our ability to detect fixed and moving objects under dense foliage. The most important part of that technology was the widespread awareness of the benefits of coherent radar and the advent of digital processing. Almost as important was the quantification of the radar propagation through foliage, and its scattering and loss effects.

• FOPEN synthetic aperture radar (SAR) with concentration on development results from several systems. These systems were developed for both military and commercial applications, and during a time of rapid awareness of the need and ability to operate in a dense signal environment. A brief description of each radar system will be provided along with illustrations of the SAR image and fixed object detection capability. The next section will quantify the benefits of polarization diversity in detecting and characterizing both man made and natural objects. There is a clear benefit for use of polarization in the target characterization and false alarm mitigation. Finally the techniques developed for ultra wideband and ultra wide angle image formation will be presented.

• New research in Multi-mode Ultra-Wideband Radar, with the design of both SAR and moving target indication (MTI) FOPEN systems. Particular note will be taken on the benefits and difficulties in designing these ultra-wideband (UWB) systems, and operation in real world electromagnetic environments. At common FOPEN frequencies, the systems have generally been either SAR or MTI due to the difficulties of obtaining either bandwidth or aperture characteristics for efficient operation. The last two sections of the tutorial will illustrate new technologies that are appearing in the literature that have promise for future multimode operation: the need to detect low minimum discernable velocity movement; and the operation of bistatic SAR in concert with a stationary GMTI illumination waveform.

AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: MIMO radar: snake oil or good idea?

MIMO (multiple input multiple output) communication is theoretically superior to conventional comm. under certain conditions, and MIMO comm. also appears to be practical and cost effective in the real World for some applications. It is natural to suppose that the same is true for MIMO radar, but the situation is not so clear. Researchers claim many advantages of MIMO radar relative to boring old phased array radars (SIMO radar). We will evaluate such assertions from a radar system engineering viewpoint. It is very rare to see a paper on MIMO radar with a correct quantitative apples & apples comparison including cost, complexity, risk and all relevant real World physical effects. Moreover, MIMO radar researchers often use boring old phased arrays in a highly suboptimal way, whereas the MIMO radar is used optimally. Hardboiled radar system engineers view such comparisons with skepticism.

Lecture Title: Never trust a simulation without a simple back-of-the-envelope calculation that explains it

Simulations are a crucial tool for systems engineers, and I have coded, developed, analyzed, tested, debugged and debunked many such simulations. However, they cannot be trusted. All too often system engineers come a cropper due to believing the results of simulations without making sure that the results are correct and relevant. Significant errors can occur for many reasons: bugs, bugs, bugs, incorrect parameters, incorrect physical models, incorrect application of perfectly fine code, incorrect interpretation of accurate results, etc. I was deeply shaped by a system

engineering culture that valued simple back-of-the-envelope calculations to provide insight into what was going on. Moreover, I am appalled when I see system engineers blindly believe the

results of simulations. My talk will give five or ten examples of system engineering blunders caused by faulty simulations or erroneous physical experiments, as well as two surprising twists.

Lecture Title: Nonlinear filters with particle flow

We have invented a new particle filter, which improves accuracy by several orders of magnitude compared with the extended Kalman filter for difficult nonlinear problems. Our filter runs

many orders of magnitude faster than standard particle filters for problems with dimension higher than four. We do not resample particles, and we do not use any proposal density, which is a

radical departure from other particle filters. We show very interesting movies of particle flow and many numerical results. The key idea is to compute Bayes’ rule using a flow of particles

rather than as a point wise multiplication; this solves the well known problem of “particle degeneracy”. Our derivation is based on freshman calculus and physics. This talk is for normal engineers who do not have log-homotopy for breakfast.

Lecture Title: Real World data fusion

Fusion of data from multiple sensors has the promise of substantial improvement in system performance for many important applications. However, there are several practical issues that must

be addressed to achieve such improvement: (1) residual bias errors between sensors; (2) dense multiple target environments; (3) unresolved data; (4) errors in data association between sensors; (5) sensor errors that are not fixed in time or space but which are not white noise either. We describe state-of-the-art algorithms that attempt to mitigate such problems. We show simple back-of-theenvelope formulas which quantify the situation, as well as one well known formula that is extremely pessimistic.

Lecture Title: Is there a royal road to robustness?

There is much confusion and misinformation about robustness among engineers. For example, many smart hard working and well educated engineers believe that there are decision rules and

estimation algorithms that are more robust than Bayesian algorithms. In particular, some engineers think that fuzzy logics or Dempster-Shafer methods are more robust than Bayesian methods.

We discuss a long list of standard methods to improve robustness, as well as a little known fact about the robustness of Bayesian algorithms.

BoG 2013-2015; VP Member Services; AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016); IEEE Fellow


Lecture Title: Navigation Sensors and Systems in GNSS Degraded and Denied Environments

Position, velocity, and timing (PVT) signals from the Global Positioning System (GPS) are used throughout the world but the availability and reliability of these signals in all environments has become a subject of concern for both military and civilian applications. International news reports about a successful spoofing attack on a civilian UAV at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico, USA have increased concerns over the planned use of UAVs in the national airspace and safety of flight in general. Other examples of the effects of GPS interference and jamming are illustrated in this presentation. This is a particularly difficult problem that requires new and innovative ideas to fill the PVT gap when the data are degraded or unavailable. One solution is to use inertial and/ or other sensors to bridge the gap in navigation information. This presentation summarizes recent advances in navigation sensor technology, including GPS, inertial, and other navigation aids. This presentation also describes recent advances in sensor integration technology and the synergistic benefits are explored. Expected technology improvements to system robustness are also described. Applications being made possible by this advanced performance include personal navigation systems, robotic navigation, and autonomous systems with unprecedented low-cost and accuracy.

Lecture Title: Inertial System and GPS Technology Trends

This presentation presents a roadmap for the development of inertial sensors, the Global Positioning System (GPS), and integrated inertial navigation system (INS)/GPS technology. This roadmap will lead to better than 1-m accuracy, low-cost, moving platform navigation in the near future. Such accuracy will enable military and civilian applications which were previously unthought-of a few years ago. After a historical perspective, a vision of the inertial sensor instrument field and inertial systems for the future is given. Accuracy and other planned improvements for GPS are explained. The trend from loosely-coupled to tightly-coupled INS/GPS systems to deeply-integrated INS/GPS is described, and the synergistic benefits are explored. Some examples of the effects of GPS interference and jamming are illustrated. Expected technology improvements to system robustness are also described. Applications that will be made possible by this new technology include personal navigation systems, robotic navigation, and autonomous systems with unprecedented low-cost and accuracy.

AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: National Missile Defense

The Bush Administration made major changes to the National Missile Defense (NMD) system that had been developed earlier by the Clinton Administration and established a limited system in Alaska to counter threats from North Korea. But even with the new emphasis on anti-terrorism and closer relations with Russia, NMD was still a very controversial topic as seen with the U.S. proposal to install parts of the Missile Defense System in Europe for protection against Iran. The European proposal had negative impacts on the US/Russia relations during the later years of the Bush Administration. The Obama administration is trying to mend relations with Russia by taking a new look at the system proposed for Europe.

The NMD program will continue to be a key technical, political, and legislative issue facing the U.S. and the rest of the world. The Bush Administration focused more on testing and developing new equipment for the NMD system and also investigated a wider variety of sensors (such as space-based and sea-based systems) to detect and track incoming missiles. The upgrade to the existing Early Warning Radars was one of the few features that did not change from the Clinton plan. The Obama Administration is still finalizing its approach to NMD.

This talk will provide background information on the political issues facing NMD. It will also provide technical information on some of the major systems including upgrades to the Early Warning Radars. The talk will also provide system engineering details on the proposed elements of the system that could be installed in Europe.

AESS Past President 1982-1983; AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: Satellite Communication Systems

Satellite Communications is a thriving industry, and many global, regional and domestic systems are currently providing satcom services throughout the world. The talk briefly traces the development of commercial satcom systems over the last 45 years, and describes some of the existing and proposed systems to serve fixed and mobile users, their interaction with terrestrial systems, and the basic technologies involved. It concludes with a discussion of current market and regulatory issues, major trends, and potential capabilities in the near future.

AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: Antenna Systems for Aerospace Vehicles

The lecture module covers the design requirement for various types of antenna system viz., omni-directional, directional, wide/shaped beam patterns, multi-beam, scanning (active/passive etc.) antenna for space applications to be used on launchers, satellites and inter-planetary probes at various frequencies of operations. The module starts with basics of antenna, then the criterion for choosing antenna types, spacecraft body effects on design and mounting considerations along with measurement techniques and the qualification procedures. The module will also cover the RF link calculation procedures and G/T measurement/estimation techniques for space borne & ground stations.

Lecture Title: Global Navigation Satellite System

Conventional Satellite technology has got three applications : Communication, Remote Sensing and, Scientific Studies. The latest one to add to this list is Satellite Based Navigation also referred as Satellite Navigation/Global Positioning System and lately termed as Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS). With the technological advancement taking place in mobile communications, controls, automobiles, aviation, geodesy, geological survey, military operations, precision farming, town planning, banking, weather predictions, power grid synchronization etc., in spite of each one having separate domain, there is one thing common in all of them for their future; that is the Precise-position, Timing and Velocity (PVT) – information, which can only be provided by Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS).

Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) is a vast system of systems, providing global positioning, navigation and timing information to scores of users in oceans, land, air and even in space. The lecture module traces the history of navigation, evolution of navigation satellite systems, the three present constellations (GPS,GLONAS,GALILEO) and the world scenario in this direction including the S-BAS system. The lecture module will also touch upon the basics of position, velocity and time measurements, various GNSS connected aspects, their applications and the technologies associated including the S-BAS system.

AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: Target Tracking and Data Fusion: How to Get the Most Out of Your Sensors

This talk describes the evolution of the technology of tracking objects of interest (targets) in a cluttered environment using remote sensors. Approaches for handling target maneuvers (unpredictable motion) and false measurements (clutter) are discussed. Advanced ("intelligent") techniques with moderate complexity are described. The emphasis is on algorithms which model the environment and the scenarios of interest in a realistic manner and have the ability to track low observable (LO) targets. The various architectures of information processing for multi-sensor data fusion are discussed. Applications are presented from Air Traffic Control (data fusion from 5 FAA radars for 800 targets) and underwater surveillance for a LO target.

AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: MIMO Radar – Demystified and Where it Makes Sense to Use

• Contrary to claims made MIMO does not offer orders of magnitude better resolution and accuracy (like x10 or x100 or x1000 better) than conventional arrays.Wrongcomparison is being made.Specifically it is madebetween a MIMO full/thin array system(consisting of a full transmit array and thinned receive array or vice versa) with a system consisting of conventional full transmit and receive arrays. We show that a conventional thin/full arraycan achieve the SAME accuracy as the MIMO thin/full array.Is there a situation where the MIMO array radar offers a better accuracy than a conventional array radar? Yes. This is achieved with a monostatic MIMO system consisting of full transmit and receive arrays when compared to the same array used conventionally. However, only about a √2=1.414 better accuracyis achieved with this MIMO array radar. The two have the same resolution though.The √2=1.414 improvement in accuracy is important where space a problem. However, it must be traded-off against the very large processing load incurred using a MIMO array versusachieving the same √2=1.414 improvement in accuracy with a conventional radar system byincreasing the radiatedpower by just a factor of two or by increasing the receive antenna size by a factor √2=1.414.

• MIMO typically requires a different orthogonal waveform for each element for an N element MIMO array. We call such an array an element-MIMO array or E-MIMO array. This results in a large computational load. Requires FN2matched filters for N element array vs N for conventional array, where F is the number of matched filters needed per orthogonal waveform due tothe need for different matched filters for different signalDoppler shifts. In contrast a conventional array radar can use a linear FM waveform (chirp waveform) which is not sensitive to the signal doppler so that only F matched filters are needed instead of FN2, a factor of NF less or 30,000 if N=1,000 and F=30.

• It would be thought that because of the larger degrees of freedom that a MIMO array radar has it would provide better barrage noise jammer rejection. Actually its jammer rejection capability is the same. This becomes obvious when one realizes that the jammer rejection can be done first in the receiver without effecting the optimality of signal detection. When doing this the ability to reject the jammer or jammers is not dependent on the waveforms transmitted, and in turn whether it is a MIMO or conventional system. For a receive array of N elements the receiver architecture can consist of the formation of N focused beams for the detection of the targets over the field-of-view. The jammers present in each of the focused beams is rejected using a sidelobe cancellers (SLC) for each focused beam output. The auxiliary signals for the SLCs for a given beam are obtained from the outputs of the focused beams pointed in the directions of the jammers. The location of the beams pointed at the jammers can be easily determined by noting the strength of the outputs of the focused beams. The focused beams are approximations of eigenbeams. Ideally they should have nulls or low sidelobes in the direction of the jammers. This is an application of adaptive-adaptive beam forming for the jammer suppression (Brookner and Howell, IEEE Proc., April, 1986). Next the outputs of each of the jammer suppressed N focused beams is followed by transmit focused beamforming which consists first of a bank of FN matched filters followed the beam formers. This architecture avoids doing the jammer suppression after the jammer signals go through the orthogonal matched filters. Rec

• It has been claimed that MIMO can handle hot clutter (which is barrage noise jammer signals received after reflection from the ground) whereas conventional arrays can not. This is not true, conventional arrays can handle hot clutter just as well as MIMO arrays. Can reject hot clutter coming into the mainlobe of the target beam without rejecting the signal return equally as well for conventional as for MIMO arrays.

• MIMO array radar does provide better clutter rejection because nulls can be adaptively placed in direction of the clutter in the transmit beams as well as the receive beams. But this is at a cost in signal processing. What may be preferred in practice in most situations is to do what can be done for conventional array radars. That is to non-adaptively put nulls or form low sidelobes in the transmitbeams in the direction of the strong clutter whose direction would be known.

• When doing volume search an E-MIMO arrayradar is inefficient re energy usage and occupancy.Should instead use Subarray-MIMO (SA-MIMO) for search. SA-MIMO involves the breaking up the N element array into Nssubarrays on transmit and receive where each subarray behaves like a conventional array.This allows one to tailor the transmitted energy to the element beam shape loss. SA-MIMO will improve the search efficiency for a 120o horizon fence by 3.7 to 5.2 dB for element ideality factors n of respectively 1 and 1.5, where the element one way embedded element gain is given by cosn, where n is the ideality factor. SA-MIMO also reduces the signal processing throughput required by the factor Ns/N.

In near term MIMO radar usefulfor combining radars to get 9 dB higher Power-Aperture-Gain (PAG) and 6 dB higher Power-Aperture (PA). Also potentially useful for over-the-horizon (OTH) high frequency (HF) radars where signal bandwidth and the number of elements are not large. May be useful where size is a premium. Its advantages for airborne systems is not addressed here. MIMO is useful for communications where it takes advantage of channel multipath to increase channel data rate.

Lecture Title: Around The World In 60 Minutes –EXOTIC PLACES WITH A TWIST

An informative and humorous adventure covering: (1) China: the Yangtze River, Three Gorge Dam, Chinese Opera and Acrobatics, their dynamic growth, their amazing capitalistic, communist run country with its very modern cities of Shanghai, Beijing and Xian and its famous terracotta soldiers; (2) Nepal: its friendly colorful people, cremations, animal sacrifices, mountains and beautiful county side; (3) Vietnam: their very warm full of energy people, the colorful ethnic minority tribe people, markets, Hanoi Hilton, Golden Triangle (where opium is grown), Mekong River, Mai Chau and Perfume Pagoda; (4) Singapore: it is clean and very strict (known for its canings) but it is also offers some of the most interesting things to see in the world like the Indian HinduThaipusam Festival (with cheek, tongue, torso piercing which make our hippies look tame) and Fire Walking (over red hot coal), Chinese, Arab and Malaysian culture, a world class zoo and lots of good shopping; (5) Sumatra, Indonesia: get close to free roaming orangutans, beautiful scenery and people, very low cost touring, what I call professional travelers go there for 6, 12 or 24 months of traveling at a time; (6) Turkey: take a tour of Capredocia in a hot air balloon and see the famous cave dwelling there, visit Istanbul where the East meets the West, opulent heritage dating back some 8,000 years to Neolithic settlements, now a modern, exciting, lively city.; (6) Saudi Arabia: see the very modern and beautiful King Saudi University in Riyadh, visit Jubail (Dharan) and Jeddah and see its people and culture, see the separate life of the expatriates; (7) Papua New Guinea: visit these colorful people who where first discovered in 1930 living in an iron age, like going back time and seeing how we lived many years ago, a living museum; (8) also visit India, South Korea, Taiwan, Chile, France, Russia, Thailand, England, Spain, Peru, Japan, Hong Kong, Macau, Mexico, Africa, Shemya (an island far out on the Aleutian Island Chain of Alaska), Norway, Austria, Holland, Germany, Malaysia, Canada, Israel, Switzerland, Australia, the Netherlands, Belgium, Union of South Africa, Egypt, New Zealand, Brazil, Philippines, Borneo, Bali.

This will be a talk of adventure, knowledge, humor and colorful slides. A show not to be missed. All are invited. Family and friends. An opportunity to bring your spouse, children, parents, neighbors and friends. The twist is an explanation that all can understand on how radars and phased arrays work and some of the recent amazing breakthroughs in radars.

Lecture Title: Outstanding Advances in Phased-Arrays and Radar

Many think that radar is a mature field, nothing new to happen, it having been around a long time. Nothing can be further from the truth. When I entered the field in the '50s I thought the same thing. The MIT Radiation Lab. Series 28 book volume set summarizing the highly classified World War II work on radar was just published and provided the definitive coverage and there was to be nothing more to learn. How wrong I was. Since then many amazing new developments have taken place. And astounding developments are still taking place. We live in exciting times.
We will cover the following recent outstanding breakthroughs in this talk:

1. Integrated circuits at microwaves (MMIC): Makes it possible to have:
a. Active arrays for applications not feasible before, like simultaneously air-to-air and air-to-ground modes on the F-18.

b. Whole T/R module on a single chip costing $10 at X-band.

c. $19K 35 GHz active phased array costing $30 per element.

d. 8 active array receive channels on one chip -- disruptive technology.

2. SiGe, CMOS: Offers potential for alternative low-cost, low-power per element active phased arrays.

3. Packaging and Assembly of Phased Using Commercial Printed Circuit Boards (PCB): Provides low cost arrays.

4. MEMS (Micro-ElectroMechanical Systems): Reliability has increased 3 orders of magnitude in 3 years. Has potential for providing arrays at 1/10th the cost.

5. Wide bandgap GaN and SiC MMIC chips: Potential of one to two orders increase in transistor power.

6. Digital Beam Forming (DBF): Provides the advantages of:
a. Multiple beams
b. Lower search power and occupancy by up to a factor of 2.

c. Fully adaptive array performance without having to do a large matrix inversion (Adaptive-Adaptive Array).

7. MIMO (Multiple-Input Multiple-Outputs): This is the hot topic now. It is not all fantasy. Practical applications are:
a. Coherent combining of radars. With 2 radars we get a 9 dB increase in sensitivity.
b. Maximum signal-to-clutter interference through optimum adaption at the receiver of the transmitter as well as receiver array weights for clutter suppression.
8. Haystack Upgrade: 3 cm Resolution Imaging.
9. SAR (Synthetic Aperture Radar): 4" Resolution achieved.
10. Wideband Antennas:
a. 1.8 to 18 GHz instantaneous bandwidth array built by Raytheon.
b. 33:1 Instantaneous bandwidth antenna built by GTRI; 100:1 possible.
11. Vacuum Tubes:
a. Coherent gyrotron amplifiers: Now available at mm-waves.
b. Bandwidth, power, reliability, and efficiency greatly increased.
12. Metamaterials: Revolutionary negative index of refraction material can:
a. Stealth a radar target.
b. Permit focusing beyond the diffraction limit. Moore's Law marches on.
13. Adaptive Array Processing and Space Time Adaptive Processing (STAP):
13. KASSPER: Applies available environment knowledge to STAP to reduce false alarms by order of magnitude.
The above lecture can be tailored to the interests of the group.

Lecture Title: Achievement, Breakthroughs and Future Trends in Phased Arrays and Radars – Updated to 2014

Summary: Covered will be recent developments in radar and phased arrays, including metamaterials, graphene, digital beam forming, micromachining, low cost arrays, signal processing.


Systems: 3, 4, 6 face “Aegis” systems developed by China, Japan, Australia, Netherlands, USA; FAA NexGen ATC system; AMDR, Space Fence, JLENS; S/X-band Dual Band Radar, AN/TPN-2, Airborne AESAs; Low Cost Packaging: Raytheon funding development of low cost flat panel X-band array using COTS type PCB; Lincoln-Lab/ MA-COM developing low cost S-band flat panel array using PCBs, overlapped subarrays and a T/R switch instead of a circulator; Extreme MMIC: 4 T/R modules on single chip possible at X-band costing ~$10 per T/R module; 8-element phased-array on one 6 to 18 GHz receiver SiGe chip having 5-bit phase control and 8:1 combiner RF-beamforming; 16-element 45 to 50 GHz phased array transmitter chips; accurate on-chip built-in-self-test (BIST) at W-Band demonstrated on such extreme MMIC chips that drastically reduces testing and calibration time; wafer scale integration demonstrated at 110 GHz with high efficiency antennas and RF circuitry on-wafer, no dicing or mm-wave packaging; Within the next decade we expect to see such extreme MIMCs in garage door openers, videos players, computers, etc. all communicating with each other wirelessly needing ever higher bandwidth; Also used for communications MIMO at mm-wave with ultra-low cost multi-beam AESAs imbedded in everyday devices; Digital Beam Forming: Israel, Australia and Thales AESAs have an A/D for every element channel, a major breakthrough; Lincoln Lab and AFRL X-band have 600 MHz instantaneous wideband DBF at element development effort; Raytheon developing mixer-less direct RF A/D having >400 MHz instantaneous bandwidth reconfigurable from S to X-band; Low cost DBF at element arrays for on-the-move Ethernet by IMST Germany; MIT Lincoln Lab using 2W chip increases spurious free dynamic range of receiver plus A/D by 20 dB by compensating for receiver plus A/D nonlinearities, a 20 year advance; Radio Astronomy scientists looking at using arrays with DBF; Materials: With GaN can now put 5X to 10X the power of GaAs in same footprint; SiGe for backend, GaN for front end of T/R module. Will be helped by use for PCs, notebooks, cell phones, servers and GaN LED where they are expected to replace incandescent bulbs $100 billion industry; Si replacing GaAs and GaN for low cost from microwaves to mm waves; Metamaterials: Potentially low cost electronically steered antenna not using phase shifters at 20 and 30 GHz being developed; Stealthing by absorption from 2-20GHz, cloaking (where microwave signal goes around the target) demonstrated over 50% band at L-band; Can now focus 6X beyond diffraction limit at 0.38 μm – Moore’s Law can march on; French, SPCI PARISTECH, demonstrated 40X diffraction limit, λ/80, at 375 MHz; Can extend to IR; Can now customize 3-D metamaterials at optical wavelengths; Was used in cell phones to obtain antennas 5X smaller (1/10th λ) and have 700 MHz-2.7 GHz bandwidth simultaneously serving GPS, Blue Tooth, Wi Max and WiFi; Provides isolation between closely spaced antennas and antenna elements, Un. Michigan demonstrated equivalence of 1m separation with only 2.5 cm separation of two antennas on a ground plane using electronic bandgap (EBG) material; n--Doped graphene has negative index of refraction, first such material found in nature; US Army developed very low profile (3.3”) wideband UHF (250 to 505 MHz) magnetic metamaterial antenna which can replace the large very visible whip antenna used on Army vehicles at present; WAIM (Wide Angle Inmpedance Matching) demonstrated for phased arrays using Electromagnetic Band-Gap (EBG) material to reduce mutual coupling; Very Low Cost Systems: Valeo Raytheon (now Valeo Radar) developed low cost, $100s only, car 25 GHz 7 beam phased array radar; about 2 million sold already, more than all the radars ever built up to a very few years ago; Commercial ultra low cost 77 GHz Roach radar on 72mm2 chip with >8 bits 1 GS/s A/D and 16 element array; Un. Frequency Michigan developing low cost 240GHz 4.2x3.2x0.15 cm2 5 gm radar for bird inspired robots and crawler robots, scans 2ox8o beam ±25o; DARPA has goal to build 28,000 element 94 GHz array costing $1/element, 50 W total RF peak power; MIT offers courses for building SARs and AESAs costing only 100s of dollars; SAR/ISAR: Principal Components of matrix formed from prominent scatterers track history used to determine target unknown motion and thus compensate for it to provide focused ISAR image; Army Research Lab demonstrated 12 dB reduction in sidelobes of forward looking SAR back projection images for IED ultra wideband radar by use of Recursive Sidelobe Minimization (RSM) Algorithm; Technology and Algorithms: MEMS: reliability reaches 300 billion cycles without failure, Can reduce the power amplifier (PA) count or T/R module count in an array by a factor of 2 to 4, can also be used as tuneable microwave filters, like 8-12 GHz with ~200 MHz BW; MEMS + Piezoelectric Material = piezoMEMS: Is being looked at for use with flying insect robots; Revolutionary 3-D Micromachining: integrated circuitry for microwave components, like 16 element Ka-band array with Butler beamformer on 13X2 cm2 chip; COSMOS: DARPA revolutionary COSMOS program: Will allow integration of III-IV, CMOS and optics on one chip without bonded wires, Lead to higher performance, lower power, smaller size, components; MIMO (Multiple Input Multiple Output): where it makes sense, point out that contrary to what is believed conventional array radars can provide the same 1, 2 or 3 orders of magnitude resolution and accuracy improvement as claimed for MIMO arrays; Also MIMO does not provide any better noise jammer rejection or hot clutter rejection (noise jammer received by antenna after reflection from ground) than conventional array radars; Graphene: Potential for terahertz clock speeds using graphene transistors; Could be used for non-volatile memory, flexible displays and camouflage clothing, self cooling; Can be used as switch with 100,000 to 1 on/off ratio, IBM producing 200 mm wafers with RF devices; Signal Processing: Potential use of electron spin for memory; Potential for use of 12 iron atoms for 1 bit of memory; provide hard drive with 100X today density; DARPA UHPC Program: 100 GFlops in cell phone using only 2 W instead of the present required 600 W for the same throughput. Goal of DARPA-Intel UHPC program for 100 to 1000 reduction in computer required power by 2018; Intel manufacturing chips using 3D integrated circuits, Moore’s marches on; STAP: Use of STAP equivalent to 6 dB increase in antenna SLL 1-way; Knowledge based STAP using map information provides 15 dB higher S/I when using information on road locations, 10 dB when putting nulls in antenna pattern where strong clutter is; Superconductivity: We may still achieve superconductivity at room temperature. Superconductivity recently obtained for first time with iron compounds. May reveal what leads to superconductivity; Additional Advances: Potential for low cost printing of RF and digital circuits through use of metal-insulator-metal (MIM) diodes; Iridium/GPS (IGPS) Positioning Navigation and Timing (PNT) system demonstrated ability to locate objects to within 1 cm in minute; 3D Display: From 2D image without the need for special eyeglasses. Can be used for displaying 3D SAR and ISAR image on our radar screens. Being used for video games; Butler matrix using CMOS; Biodegradable array of transistors or LEDs for detecting cancer or low glucose; can then dispense chemotherapy or insulin; parallel processing to map our DNA for $1000; Can now grow functioning kidney and heart for rats; New polarizations, OAMs???

BoG 2014-2016; Chapter Chair Liaison; AESS Magazine Associate Editor (Area of specialty: Avionics Systems); AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: Overview of High-Level Information Fusion Theory, Models, and Representations

The High-Level Information Fusion (HLIF) lecture describes the developments over the past decade on concepts, papers, needs, and grand challenges for practical system designs. This lecture brings together the contemporary concepts, models, and definitions to give the attendee a summary of the state-of-the-art in HLIF research (e.g., situation awareness and interface design between manmachine information fusion systems). Analogies from low-level information fusion (LLIF) of object tracking and identification are extended to the HLIF concepts of situation/impact assessment and process/user refinement. HLIF theories (operational, functional, formal, cognitive) are mapped to representations (semantics, ontologies, axiomatics, and agents) with contemporary issues of modeling, testbeds, evaluation, and human-machine interfaces. Discussions with examples of search and rescue, cyber analysis, and surveillance are presented. The attendee will gain an appreciation of HLIF through the topic organization from the perspectives of numerous authors, practitioners, and developers of information fusion systems. The lecture is organized as per the recent text: E. P. Blasch, E. Bosse, and D. A. Lambert, Information Fusion Theory and Representations, Artech House, April 2012, of (1) HLIF theories (2) HLIF representations in information fusion testbeds, and (3) HLIF supporting elements of humansystem interaction, scenario-based design, and HLIF evaluation.

BoG 2014-2016; Treasurer (2014-2015); AESS Past President (2008-2009); Fellows Evaluation Committee Chair; Student Activities Co-Chair; NDIA Liaison; AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016); IEEE Fellow


Lecture Title: Business Case for Systems Engineering - Is Systems Engineering Effective?

Lecture Abstract

One of the oft-discussed elements in the field of Systems Engineering is how can one justify the expenditure of program or project monies for systems engineering? In short, what is the payback, or business case, for doing systems engineering? Those who are somewhat knowledgeable in the field of systems engineering know what the value is, but what are the tangible results of doing SE on programs and projects? How do we convince our program and project managers that SE is needed, or essential?

The Systems Engineering Division of the National Defense Industrial Association, in conjunction with the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) of Carnegie Mellon University initiated a comprehensive study in 2008 to try to determine the tangible benefits of performing SE in terms of program/project performance. The study consisted of a series of questions based on SE work products as defined in CMMI® (Capability Maturity Model Integration), which is the currently accepted systems engineering process model in widespread adoption, worldwide. The study concluded that there indeed is a positive correlation of SE performed and program/project performance in terms of budget (cost), schedule and requirements.

The number of responses to this initial study survey was small, in the order of 46 valid responses, from the US defense industry. In order to validate the results with a larger response base to include commercial as well as non-US organizations, in 2011 the NDIA and SEI partnered with the IEEE Aerospace & Electronic Systems Society to reach a broader audience, and the results of this updated survey with over 180 valid responses was completed and released in late 2012.

This lecture will present the results of the updated study of SE performed on programs/projects and program performance in terms of cost, schedule and requirements. It will show that programs with the greater amount of SE performed demonstrate the best performance, while the programs with less SE had a lower rate of success. Since the study correlates program successes in terms of specific SE activities, these results can be used within organizations to assist in establishing systems engineering plans on programs and projects.

BoG 2015-2017; VP Education; Distinguished Lecturer/Tutorials Program Chair; Robert T. Hill Best Dissertation Award Chair; Online Tutorials Chair; AESS Magazine Contributing Editor, AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: Over-The-Horizon Radar: Fundamental Principles, Adaptive Processing and Emerging Applications.

Skywave over-the-horizon (OTH) radars operate in the high frequency (HF) band (3–30 MHz) and exploit signal reflection from the ionosphere to detect and track targets at ranges of 1000 to 3000 km. The long-standing interest in OTH radar technology stems from its ability to provide persistent and cost-effective early-warning surveillance over vast geographical areas (millions of square kilometres). Australia is recognized as a world-leader in the OTH radar field. Pioneering research and development covering every facet of this technology has resulted in the multi-billion-dollar Jindalee Operational Radar Network (JORN) of three state-of-the-art operational OTH radars in Australia.

The first part of the tutorial introduces the fundamental principles of OTH radar design and operation in the challenging HF environment to motivate and explain the architecture and capabilities of modern OTH radar systems. The second describes mathematical models characterizing the HF propagation channel and adaptive processing techniques for clutter and interference mitigation. The third delves into emerging applications, including HF passive radar, blind signal separation and multipath-driven geolocation. A highlight of the tutorial is the prolific inclusion of experimental results illustrating the application of robust signal processing techniques to real-world OTH radar systems. This is expected to benefit students, researchers and practitioners with limited prior knowledge of HF radar and with an interest in the application of advanced processing techniques to practical systems.

Lecture Title: Robust Adaptive Array Processing for Radar

Adaptive array processing techniques represent a key element for enhancing the performance and capabilities of multi-channel radar systems that must operate in demanding and complex disturbance environments, which in general includes clutter, man-made interference and naturally-occurring noise. The first part of this lecture recalls some foundational adaptive processing principles and the main assumption and conditions under which seminal theoretical results have been derived. The second contrasts these main assumptions and conditions with those actually encountered by a wide range of practical radar systems that operate in real-world environments. In the presence of environmental uncertainties, instrumental imperfections, and operational constraints, which are ubiquitously faced by practical systems, the implementation of robust adaptive techniques becomes an essential ingredient for effective and efficient operation. The third part of this lecture discusses the design and application of robust adaptive array processing techniques in the dimensions of space, time and space-time. Experimental results are illustrated for OTH radar systems to lend concreteness by way of example. This lecture is expected to benefit students, researchers and practitioners with an interest in the effective and efficient application of advanced processing techniques to practical radar systems.

BoG 2013-2015; Associate Editor-in-Chief, Transactions on AES, AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016); IEEE Fellow


Lecture Title: Tracking and Sensor Data Fusion – Methodological Framework and Selected Applications.

The tutorial covers material of the recently published book of the presenter with the same title (Springer 2014, Mathematical Engineering Series, ISBN 978-3-642-39270-2) and thus provides an guided introduction to deeper reading. Starting point is the well known JDL model of sensor data and information fusion that provides general orientation within the world of fusion methodologies and its various applications, covering a dynamically evolving field of ever increasing relevance. Using the JDL model as a guiding principle, the tutorial introduces into advanced fusion technologies based on practical examples taken from real world applications.

Lecture Title: Multistatic Exploration – Introduction to Modern Passive Radar and Multistatic Tracking & Data Fusion

Advanced distributed signal and data fusion for passive radar systems, where DVB TV or GSM mobile phone base stations are used as sources for illuminating targets, for example, is a topic of increasing interest. Even in remote regions of the world, transmitters of electromagnetic radiation become a potential radar transmitter stations enabling covert surveillance for air, sea, and ground scenarios. Analogous considerations are valid for sub-sea surveillance. Illustrated by examples and experimental results, principles of passive radar as well as advanced multistatic tracking and de-ghosting techniques will be discussed.

BoG 2015-2017; Secretary; AESS Magazine Editor-in-Chief (Areas of Specialty: Radar Clutter Models, Radar Signal Processing, Radar Systems); Harry Rowe Mimno Award Chair; Fellows Search Chair; Radar Systems Panel Chair, Distinguished Lecturer; IEEE Fellow


Lecture Title: Sensor selection for multistatic radar networks

After an introduction to bistatic/multistatic radar systems, the talk will focus on multistatic passive radars. The characteristics of the systems with different sources of opportunity will be described.

The concept of bistatic ambiguity function (BAF), often used to measure the possible global resolution and large error properties of the target parameters estimates, will be introduced and its relation with the Fisher Information Matrix (FIM) and Cramér-Rao Lower Bounds (CRLBs) highlighted. Some example will be provided concerning active LFM radar and passive radar using an UMTS or FM signal as source of opportunity.

The information gained through the calculation of the bistatic CRLBs can be used in a multistatic radar system for the dynamic choice of the optimum Tx-Rx pair or set of bistatic channels for radar target tracking in a multistatic scenario. Taking advantage of the knowledge of the CRLBs is a kind of “radar cognition”, that, applied in multistatic realistic scenarios with both active and passive sensors, can improve the performance of the target tracker and reduce the computational load of surveillance operations. Some results will be shown in both certain and uncertain radar measurements.

Lecture Title: Advanced Techniques of Radar Detection in Non-Gaussian Background

For several decades, the Gaussian assumption on the disturbance modeling in radar systems has been widely used to deal with detection problems. But, in modern high-resolution radar systems, the disturbance cannot be modelled as Gaussian distributed and the classical detectors suffer from high losses.

In this talk, after a brief description of modern statistical and spectral models for high-resolution clutter, coherent optimum and sub-optimum detectors, designed for such a background, will be presented and their performance analyzed against a non-Gaussian disturbance. Different interpretations of the various detectors are provided that highlight the relationships and the differences among them.

After this first part, some discussion will be dedicated to how to make adaptive the detectors, by incorporating a proper estimate of the disturbance covariance matrix. Recent works on Maximum Likelihood and robust covariance matrix estimation have proposed different approaches such as the Approximate ML (or Fixed-Point) Estimator or the M-estimators. These techniques allow to improve the detection performance in terms of false alarm regulation and detection gain in SNR.

Some of results with simulated and real recorded data will be shown.

Lecture Title: Sea and land clutter statistical analysis and modeling

The modeling of the clutter echoes is a central issue for the design and performance evaluation of radar systems. Main goal of this lecture is to describe the state-of-the-art approaches to the modeling and understanding of land and sea clutter echoes and their implications on performance prediction and signal processors design.

The lecture first introduces radar sea and ground clutter phenomena, measurements and measurement limitations, at high and low resolution, high and low grazing angles with particular attention to classical model for RCS prediction. Most part of the lecture will be dedicated to modern statistical and spectral models for high resolution sea and ground clutter and to the methods of experimental validation using recorded data sets. Some comparison between monostatic and bistatic sea clutter data will be provided together with some results on non-stationarity analysis of the high resolution sea clutter.

AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: Cognitive Dynamic Systems (CDS)

CDS is a new way of thinking about modeling the environment ( world) without mathematical restrictions; that is, the environment can be nonlinear, nonstattionary, and nonGaussian by virtue of the fact that it mimics the brain in cognitive terms:

a) The perception part of the CDS is based on sparse coding, well known in neuroscience.

b) The control part of the CDS is built around the cognitive reinforcement learning algorithm.

c) The perception and control are reciprocally coupled by means of a Probabilistic Reasoning Machine (PRM) that builds on four primary functions of the preferential cortex:

. working memory

. attentional set (i.e., perceptional attention and control attention)

. error monitoring

. decision making.

Putting all these functions under its umbrella, the PRM proves itself to be a system stabilizer.

d) Risk control: For the first ever, I will describe a new pre-adaptation control mechanism that addresses this most difficult problem of them all.

The lecture will expand on a joint paper, involving myself and Professor Joaquin M. Fuster , UCLA, well known around the world for his contributions to Cognitive Neuroscience. The paper will be published in the April Issue of the Proc. IEEE, which is devoted to Cognitive Dynamic Systems.

Lecture Title: Cognitive Control

In this lecture I will describe a new reinforcement algorithm derived as a special form of Bellman's optimality equation in Dynamic Programming.

I will demonstrate important properties of this new reinforcement leaning, namely

a) Linear law of computational complexity, the best it could be.

b) Unlike traditional reinforcement learning algorithms, there are no approximations whatsoever

3) It is optimal in the Bellman sense

4) It is convergent

Simply put, the new reinforcement learning algorithm is a game changer.

The related utilities include:

. Rewards

. Explore-exploit strategy

. Policy

Lecture Title: Cognitive Radar

This lecture will demonstrate how through cognition, Cognitive Radar can outperform traditional radars:

1. The perception action cycle that embodies the transmitter and receiver inside a global feedback loop

to gain information about the environment that increases from one cycle to the next.

2. Memory, that consist of perception memory in the receiver and control memory in the transmitter, with working memory

coupling them reciprocally together. Memory is dynamic with the ability to learn . It is responsive for

predicting consequences of action taken by the transmitter.

3. Attention is algorithmic in nature and builds itself through local perception action cycles

4. Intelligence is distributed throughout the system, with decision making and optimality for action on the environment.

In this lecture I will demonstrate the superior performance of Cognitive radar when it comes to:

a) Management of resources,

b) Accelerated rate of convergence by orders of magnitude

3) Mitigation of the effects of unexpected disturbance

BoG 2014-2016; VP Industry Relations; Outstanding Organizational Leadership Award Chair, AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016); IEEE Fellow


Lecture Title: Radar Adaptivity: Antenna Based Signal Processing Techniques

The lecture discusses the following topics:

• Introducing Radar: from its conception to recent industrial achievements,

• Operational needs requiring adaptivity,

• Side lobe blanking and cancellation techniques,

• Adaptive arrays of antennas,

• Some practical application examples of adaptivity,

• Conclusions and way ahead.

Each part is structured with some mathematical background, presentation of key processing algorithms, performance evaluation of the algorithms either in closed form or via Monte Carlo simulation, practical engineering implications related to the implementation of processing algorithms and, finally, examples of application potentials. A comprehensive set of technical references is also provided for further study and investigation.

AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: Effective Maritime Domain Awareness - A Systems of Systems approach to Generating Actionable Intelligence

This lecturer presents a personnel view of the complex issue of providing effective Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) of a country’s Exclusive Economic Zone to meet the needs of both Maritime Security and Maritime Safety.

Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) is about generating actionable information for confidence-based decision support. This requires collecting information pertaining to the whereabouts of all maritime targets in the surveillance area, including classification of vessel type and activity, positive identification, and threat assessment. No single sensor can achieve this and effective MDA requires a combination of passive and active surveillance and reconnaissance systems.

Assembling this picture, however, is only part of the solution. The key to effective MDA is the use of decision support tools that analyze vessel track information and identify anomalous vessel behavior.

1) Requirement for Maritime Domain Awareness

2) Maritime Regions and the Legal Framework

3) Layers of Maritime Domain Awareness

4) Comparison of Surveillance/Reconnaissance Options – Passive and Active

5) Requirement For Persistent Surveillance

6) Data Association, Fusion and Data Mining

7) Finding “the needle in the haystack” - identifying anomalistic behavior

8) Architectures for Maritime Domain Operations Centers

AESS Distinguished Lecturer (2015-2016)


Lecture Title: Compression Based Analysis of Image Artifacts: Application to Satellite Images

This work aims at an automatic detection of artifacts in optical satellite images such as aliasing, A/D conversion problems, striping, and compression noise; in fact, all blemishes that are unusual in an undistorted image.

Artifact detection in Earth observation images becomes increasingly difficult when the resolution of the image improves. For images of low, medium or high resolution, the artifact signatures are sufficiently different from the useful signal, thus allowing their characterization as distortions; however, when the resolution improves, the artifacts have, in terms of signal theory, a similar signature to the interesting objects in an image. Although it is more difficult to detect artifacts in very high resolution images, we need analysis tools that work properly, without impeding the extraction of objects in an image. Furthermore, the detection should be as automatic as possible, given the quantity and ever-increasing volumes of images that make any manual detection illusory. Finally, experience shows that artifacts are not all predictable nor can they be modeled as expected. Thus, any artifact detection shall be as generic as possible, without requiring the modeling of their origin or their impact on an image.

Outside the field of Earth observation, similar detection problems have arisen in multimedia image processing. This includes the evaluation of image quality, compression, watermarking, detecting attacks, image tampering, the montage of photographs, steganalysis, etc. In general, the techniques used to address these problems are based on direct or indirect measurement of intrinsic information and mutual information. Therefore, this thesis has the objective to translate these approaches to artifact detection in Earth observation images, based particularly on the theories of Shannon and Kolmogorov, including approaches for measuring rate-distortion and pattern-recognition based compression. The results from these theories are then used to detect too low or too high complexities, or redundant patterns. The test images being used are from the satellite instruments SPOT, MERIS, etc.

We propose several methods for artifact detection. The first method is using the Rate-Distortion (RD) function obtained by compressing an image with different compression factors and examines how an artifact can result in a high degree of regularity or irregularity affecting the attainable compression rate. The second method is using the Normalized Compression Distance (NCD) and examines whether artifacts have similar patterns. The third method is using different approaches for RD such as the Kolmogorov Structure Function and the Complexity-to-Error Migration (CEM) for examining how artifacts can be observed in compression-decompression error maps. Finally, we compare our proposed methods with an existing method based on image quality metrics. The results show that the artifact detection depends on the artifact intensity and the type of surface cover contained in the satellite image.