1 / 16

Lori Westerkamp Sensor ATR Technology Division Sensors Directorate Air Force Research Laboratory

Sensors Directorate and ATR Overview for Integrated Fusion, Performance Prediction, and Sensor Management for ATE MURI 21 July 2006. Lori Westerkamp Sensor ATR Technology Division Sensors Directorate Air Force Research Laboratory. AFRL Technology Directorates. AFRL MGen T. Bowlds. Staff.

powa
Download Presentation

Lori Westerkamp Sensor ATR Technology Division Sensors Directorate Air Force Research Laboratory

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Sensors Directorate and ATR Overviewfor Integrated Fusion, Performance Prediction, and Sensor Management for ATE MURI21 July 2006 Lori Westerkamp Sensor ATR Technology Division Sensors Directorate Air Force Research Laboratory

  2. AFRL Technology Directorates AFRL MGen T. Bowlds Staff XP Air Vehicles Space Vehicles Directed Energy Information Munitions Materials & Manu- facturing Human Effectiveness AFOSR Sensors Propulsion

  3. Sensors Directorate Our Mission To lead the discovery, development, and integration of affordable sensor and countermeasure technologies for our warfighters. Our Vision Robust sensors and adaptive countermeasures that guarantee complete freedom of air and space operations for our forces, and deny these capabilities to our adversaries at times and places of our choosing.

  4. Priority Warfighter Needs Being Addressed by Sensors Directorate • Sense, identify, and track all air and surface targets and threats world wide and in all weather • Counter “difficult” targets (WMD, hidden, LO) • Protect air and space assets • Control the battlespace electromagnetic spectrum • Rapidly prosecute time-critical targets and threats Balance: Performance & Affordability

  5. Sensors Directorate Technology Thrusts Automatic Target Recognition & Sensor Fusion Radio Frequency Sensors & Countermeasures Electro-Optical Sensors & Countermeasures • Battlespace Access • Persistent ISR of the Battlespace • Prosecution of Time Sensitive Targets Application Sub-thrusts • Signatures & Modeling • Assessment & Foundation • InnovativeAlgorithms • Radio Frequency Apertures • Algorithms & Phenomenology • Digital Receivers & Exciters • Reference Systems • Components • Transmitters & • Receivers • Phenomenology & Algorithms • Optical Apertures Enabling Sub-thrusts

  6. Potential Growth Areas • Hidden Target Detection & Identification • Automatic Target Recognition (ATR) • & Sensor Fusion • Electronic Warfare • Time Critical Targeting (TCT)

  7. ATR Scope 1 PD 0 0 FAR 10 ID M60 TRACK FUNCTIONS GEOLOCATE FIND SENSORS Algorithms Signatures MATURATION PROCESS Assessment

  8. ATR Approach FIX FIND TRACK TARGET ASSESS ENGAGE FIND FIX TRACK & ID Operational Target Models/Databases Characterized Performance High Performance Computing Operational Databases ASSESSMENT& FOUNDATION SIGNATURES & MODELING INNOVATIVE ALGORITHMS Sensor Data Management System (SDMS) Signature Center Phenomenology Exploration EM Modeling Synthetic Data Challenge Problems Standard Metrics ATR Theory

  9. ATR Facilities 1 PD 0 0 FAR 10 PD PID Sensor Resolution Advanced Recognition Capability (ARC) Facility Signature Center Sensor Data Management System (SDMS)

  10. Targets Sensors Interactions Environment Operating Conditions (OCs)

  11. “Better” Features Greater discriminating power Less variability “Better” Data Resolution, dwell, persistence, … Multiple sources (modes, looks, phenomenologies) How can we make ATR easier? T-72 T-62 Often conflicting! Fuel Drums Side Fenders Smoke Canisters Length 6.9 m Width 3.6 m Height 2.2 m Length 6.6 m Width 3.5 m Height 2.4 m

  12. ATR-Driven Sensing Cueing, Prioritization for the Human

  13. ‘Clear Box’ View of ATR 1 PD 0 0 FAR 10 Environment Detect Track Geolocate ID Sensor ATR Decisions Human Decisions Target Target Models & Database Feature Extractor Target Knowledge Discriminator Target Knowledge Decision Rule Trained Features Templates Models

  14. Multiple Sensor ATR Sensor Management Registration Adaptation Sensor Model Environment Model Behavior Models Performance Model Anticipate Environment Detect Track Geolocate ID Sensor(s) ATR Decisions Human Decisions Target Target Models & Database

  15. ATR Theory Goals • Performance Prediction • Algorithm (or feature) dependent • As a function of sensing, target, and environment conditions • Tool for developers (how will this new feature help?), “maturers” (does this work well enough for my application?), and users (is this system going to work in my scenario today?) • Performance Bounds • Algorithm independent performance limits • As a function of sensing, target, and environment conditions • Is the limit the algorithm (keep working) or the sensor (motivate sensor improvements)? • Performance Models • Packaged tools from Performance Prediction usable by sensor management and fusion algorithms to weigh sensor contribution

  16. Growing ATR Complexity Targets Dismounts Smaller More Variable Civilian Vehicles Military Vehicles Tougher Clutter More Obscuration Aircraft Environments Open Forested Urban Detect Track More Specific ID Function

More Related