IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 9, NO.

1, JANUARY 2016 285

Radar High-Speed Target Detection Based on the

Frequency-Domain Deramp-Keystone Transform
Jibin Zheng, Tao Su, Hongwei Liu, Member, IEEE, Guisheng Liao, Member, IEEE, Zheng Liu,
and Qing Huo Liu, Fellow, IEEE

Abstract—In this paper, we propose a coherent detection
algorithm for high-speed targets by employing the parametric
symmetric autocorrelation function and the frequency-domain
deramp-keystone transform (FDDKT). This coherent detection
algorithm is an extension of the scaled inverse Fourier transform
(SCIFT)-based detection algorithm. However, compared to the
SCIFT-based detection algorithm, the proposed coherent detec-
tion algorithm can acquire a better antinoise performance and
higher peak to sidelobe ratios along the Doppler frequency and
the scaled range cell. Simulations and analyses for synthetic mod-
els and the real radar data are provided to verify the effectiveness
of the proposed coherent detection algorithm.
Index Terms—Coherent detection, frequency-domain deramp-
keystone transform (FDDKT), parametric symmetric autocorre-
lation function, scaled inverse Fourier transform (SCIFT).
I. I NTRODUCTION
D UE TO THE importance for the target imaging and the
exploration of space resources, the radar high-speed tar-
get detection has attracted the attention of many researchers in
the past decades [1]–[6]. In general, for the target with the range
profile alignment, the moving target detection (MTD) algorithm
can be employed, which can be efficiently implemented via the
fast Fourier transform (FFT). However, in realistic applications,
the long observation time, the high-speed and the high-range
resolution make the linear range migration happen easily for the
modern radar [7]–[9]. The linear range migration disturbs the
range profile alignment and the MTD algorithm cannot work
anymore.
For the radar high-speed target detection with the linear range
migration, several successful detection algorithms have been
developed, such as the Radon transform [10]–[12], the Hough
transform [13]–[15], the Radon–Fourier transform [16], [17],
the maximum likelihood method [18], the modified Hough
Manuscript received April 22, 2015; revised June 24, 2015; accepted July
02, 2015. Date of publication July 22, 2015; date of current version January 28,
2016. This work was supported in part by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China under Grant 61001204, in part by the Science and technol-
ogy Foundation of Shaanxi Province (2012JM8015), and in part by the Xi’an
Polytechnic University Dr Support Foundation (BS1119).
J. Zheng, T. Su, H. Liu, G. Liao, and Z. Liu are with the National Laboratory
of Radar Signal Processing, Xidian University, Xi’an 710071, China (e-mail:
jibin_zheng@sina.cn).
Q. H. Liu is with the Department of Electronic Engineering, Duke University,
Durham, NC 27708 USA (e-mail: qhliu@ee.duke.edu).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/JSTARS.2015.2453996
1939-1404 © 2015 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
transform [19], the coherent Radon transform [20], the tra-
ditional keystone transform (KT)-based detection algorithm
[21]–[24], and the fast Radon–Fourier transform [25], [26].
These detection algorithms have been widely applied in the
radar high-speed target detection. However, these detection
algorithms need the brute-force searching of unknown motion
parameters and cannot achieve a balance between the com-
putational cost and the antinoise performance [8]. In order to
overcome these challenges, the scaled inverse Fourier trans-
form (SCIFT)-based detection algorithm is proposed in [8].
However, according to simulations and analyses in [27]–[31],
its defined symmetric autocorrelation function does not ben-
efit the antinoise performance and the peak to sidelobe ratio,
which will influence the applicability of the SCIFT-based
algorithm.
In this paper, a coherent detection algorithm, which is an
extension of the SCIFT-based detection algorithm, is pro-
posed by employing the parametric symmetric autocorrelation
function and the frequency-domain deramp-keystone transform
(FDDKT). Same as the SCIFT-based detection algorithm, this
proposed coherent detection algorithm can also achieve a good
balance between the computational cost and the antinoise per-
formance without the brute-force searching of the unknown
velocity ambiguity. However, due to the employed paramet-
ric symmetric autocorrelation function, the proposed detection
algorithm can obtain a better antinoise performance and higher
peak to sidelobe ratios along the scaled range cell and the
Doppler frequency than the SCIFT-based detection algorithm.
Through the simulation and the analysis on the synthetic data
and the real radar data, we verify the effectiveness of the
proposed detection algorithm.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section II, a coherent
detection algorithm is proposed based on the parametric sym-
metric autocorrelation function and the FDDKT. Meanwhile,
characteristics of the cross-term are also provided. Section III
gives analyses of the computational cost, the antinoise per-
formance, and the peak to sidelobe ratio. With the syn-
thetic radar data and the real radar data, the proposed detec-
tion algorithm is verified in Section IV. Section V is the
conclusion.
II. R ADAR H IGH -S PEED TARGET D ETECTION VIA THE
FDDKT W ITHOUT S EARCHING THE V ELOCITY
A MBIGUITY
For the radar high-speed target detection, the geometry used
in this paper is based on the model in [8], [16], and [17]. After

Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on May 09,2022 at 06:39:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
286 IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 9, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016

the down-conversion and the pulse compression [10], [23], the where τm denotes the lag-time with respect to tm . a denotes a
radar azimuth echo can be presented as constant delay and is related to the proposed FDDKT.
N    The idea of this parametric symmetric autocorrelation func-
2 (Ri0 + vi0 tm )
scom (t̂, tm ) = Asi sinc B t̂ − tion is borrowed from references [27]–[31]. In [30] and [31],
i=1
c mathematical analyses and simulations have been used to val-
 
2Ri0
idate advantages of this kind of the parametric symmetric
· exp −j2πfc exp (−j2πfd0i tm ) + ns t̂, tm autocorrelation function. Compared to the autocorrelation func-
c
(1) tion defined in [8], the parametric autocorrelation function
benefits the antinoise performance and the peak to sidelobe
where sinc(a) = sin (πa)/πa. t̂ is the fast time. tm = m PRI is ratio.
the slow time. m and PRI denote the transmitted pulse number Substituting (3) into (4), we obtain
index and the pulse repetition interval, respectively. Asi , Ri0 ,
  
and vi0 are the amplitude, the initial range, and the radial veloc- N
f
ity of the ith (1 ≤ i ≤ N ) target, respectively. c, fc , and fd0i Rm (f, tm , τm ) = A2ci rect exp[−j2πfd0i (τm + a)]
i=1
γTp
denote the speed of light, the carrier frequency, and the ambigu-
ous Doppler frequency, respectively. n(t̂, tm ) is the additive  
2vi0
complex white Gaussian noise. Obviously, for the azimuth echo · exp −j2π (τm + a) f exp (−j2π0tm )
c
in (1), the product of the radial velocity and the observation time
induces the linear range migration. + Rm,cross (f, tm , τm ) (5)
Performing the Fourier transform on scom (t̂, tm ) along the
t̂-axis, we obtain the compressed signal in the spatial frequency where Rm,cross (f, tm , τm ) is the cross-term and will be dis-
domain cussed in Section II-B.
N     In (5), three axes, f , tm , and τm , exist in Rm (f, tm , τm ).
f 2Ri0
C (f, tm ) = Aci rect exp −j2πfc However, the energy of the self-term along the tm -axis can
i=1
γTp c
    be accumulated to the frequency zero with the discrete Fourier
2Ri0 2vi0 tm transform (DFT), which can be realized by the addition opera-
· exp −j2πf exp −j2πf
c c tion. Thus, performing the addition operation along the tm -axis,
· exp (−j2πfd0i tm ) + nc (f, tm ) (2) we can obtain the lag-time–spatial frequency distribution

where f is the spatial frequency domain with respect to t̂. Aci 

N  
f
and nc (f, tm ) denote the amplitude and the noise after the Rm,A (f, τm ) = Gm A2ci rect exp[−j2πfd0i (τm +a)]
γTp
Fourier transform, respectively. i=1
In (2), the linear coupling in exp [−j2πf (2vi0 tm /c)] induces  
2vi0
the linear range migration. Thus, if vi0 can be obtained first, · exp −j2π (τm + a) f + Rm,A,cross (f, τm ) (6)
c
the high-speed target detection and the estimation of Ri0 can
be accomplished by the IFFT and the FFT operations, i.e., the
high-speed target can be determined by vi0 . Based on this char- where Gm and Rm,A,cross (f, τm ) denote the gain and the
acteristic, in this paper, a coherent detection algorithm will cross-term after the addition operation along the tm -axis,
be proposed for the high-speed target based on the parametric respectively.
symmetric autocorrelation function and the FDDKT. After the addition operation, the linear coupling still exists
between f and τm in the self-term of (6). Such a linear coupling
is the underlying mechanism for the blurred representation of
A. Proposed High-Speed Target Detection Algorithm the self-term on the range cell t̂ and the Doppler cell fτm plane.
Consider the noise-free compressed signal in the spatial In SAR imaging, ISAR imaging and the target detection, there
frequency domain also exists similar linear couplings. In order to remove these
    couplings, a so-called KT is utilized in [22], [23], and [28].
N
f 2Ri0 However, this KT is aimed to rescale the time domain tm and
Cm (f, tm ) = Aci rect exp −j2πfc
i=1
γTp c cannot work to rescale the frequency domain f in (6). In this
    (3) paper, we borrow the idea of the KT to propose the FDDKT,
2Ri0 2vi0 tm
· exp −j2πf exp −j2πf which is defined as
c c
· exp (−j2πfd0i tm ) . f(τm +a)
f= (7)
Based on above analyses and the format of (3), a novel h (τm + a)
parametric symmetric autocorrelation function is defined as
    where f(τm +a) is the scaled spatial frequency. h is a scaling
τm + a ∗ τm + a
Rm (f, tm , τm ) = Cm f, tm + Cm f, tm − factor corresponding to a. In [30], the selection criterions of a
2 2 and h have been discussed in detail, and optimal values of a and
(4) h are both equal to 1 for the proposed FDDKT.

Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on May 09,2022 at 06:39:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ZHENG et al.: RADAR HIGH-SPEED TARGET DETECTION BASED ON THE FDDKT 287

Applying the FDDKT of (7) to (6) to decouple the f and τm , B. Analyses of the Cross-Term
we can obtain In (9), the self-term accumulates into sole peaks, which
   can benefit the estimation of the
radial velocity. However, the

N
f(τm +a)
Rkey f(τm +a) , τm = Gm A2ci rect cross-term Qcross t̂(τm +a) , fτm also appears in (9) and may
i=1
γTp influence the detection of the self-term. With this proposed
 
2vi0 (8) detection algorithm, each signal component generates a self-
· exp [−j2πfd0i (τm + a)] exp −j2πf(τm +a) term and each pair of signal components generates a cross-term.
hc

Thus, to formulate the cross-term problem arising from mul-
+ Rkey,cross f(τm +a) , τm
titargets, we consider two high-speed targets, the lth target

and the qth target [27],
where Rkey,cross f(τm +a) , τm is the cross-term after the [28]. We analyze

characteristics of the
cross-term Ql,q.cross t̂(τm +a) , fτm in Appendix and list the
FDDKT.
Lemma.
The FDDKT defined in (7) is aimed to rescale f , while the
Lemma:
KT utilized in [22], [23], and [28] is aimed to rescale tm . It

is known, in the realistic radar application, the PRI must be 1) For vl0 = vq0 , Ql,q.cross t̂(τm +a) , fτm = 0.
large enough to guarantee the detection of the far-range target 2) For vl0 = vq0
with a high speed [16], [17]. Thus, for the high-speed target,

2Rl0 − 2Rq0
the velocity ambiguity will appear when we utilize the KT of Ql,q.cross t̂(τm +a) , fτm = Al,q,1
2
[21]–[24] to rescale tm , while the velocity ambiguity will not t̂(τm +a) − 2vhcl0 hc

appear when we utilize the FDDKT defined in (7) to rescale f , 2Rl0 − 2Rq0
i.e., the proposed FDDKT can avoid the brute-force searching · exp (j2πafτm ) cos 2π
c
for the unknown velocity ambiguity.  
In (8), the linear coupling of the self-term between f and τm fτm + fd0l
×
+ fc .
is removed with the FDDKT. Now, we perform the IFFT and h t̂(τm +a) − 2vhcl0
the FFT on (8) with respect to f(τm +a) and τm , respectively,


 Based on the Lemma above and analyses in Appendix, we
Q t̂(τm +a) , fτm = FFTτm IFFTf(τm +a) Rkey f(τm +a) , τm
N   
2vi0
= AT i exp (−j2πafd0i ) sinc B t̂(τm +a) −
hc
i=1
self-term and suppresses the cross-term.
· δ (fτm + fd0i ) + Qcross t̂(τm +a) , fτm (9)
where t̂(τm +a) and fτm are the time domain and the frequency
domain with respect to f(τm +a) and τm , respectively. FFTτm [·]
and IFFTf(τm +a) [·] denote the FFT and the IFFT operations,
respectively. AT i denotes
δ (•) denotes the Dirac
the amplitude.
delta function. Qcross t̂(τm +a) , fτm is the cross-term after the
FFT and the IFFT operations.
Obviously, the signal energy of the self-term is coherently
integrated in (9) and each high-speed target corresponds to
a sole peak at the point (2vi0 /hc, −fd0i ). Here, we assume
that the cross-term cannot accumulate (this will be verified in

Section II-B) and the radial velocity is estimated as vi0 (i = 1:
N ) with the peak detection technique [23]. Thereafter, with the
estimated radial velocities, the target detection and the estima-
tion of the initial range can be completed via the constant false
alarm ratio (CFAR) technique, the dechirp technique and the
Clean technique [8], [23], [24].
The FDDKT defined in (7) can be implemented with the
IFFT-based chirp-z transform and we can refer to [30] for the
procedures of the FDDKT. Obviously, same as the SCIFT-based
detection algorithm, this proposed detection algorithm can also
be accomplished only with the addition, the complex multipli-
cation, the FFT, and the IFFT. Thus, compared to the Hough
transform and the KT-based algorithm, the proposed detection
algorithm eliminates the brute-force searching procedure. The
elimination of the brute-force searching procedure benefits the
radar system complexity [27]–[29].
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on May 09,2022 at 06:39:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
know that, under multitargets, the cross-term cannot accumu-
late as the self-term. In the following, an example will be given
to show how the proposed detection algorithm accumulates the
Example 1: There are three point targets Au1, Au2, and
Au3 in this example. Radar parameters are set as: the car-
rier frequency fc = 15 GHz, the bandwidth B = 15 MHz,
the sample frequency Fs = 20 MHz, the pulsewidth Tp =
10 us, PRF = 200 Hz, and the number of effective integra-
tion pulses Ntm = 200. Motion parameters are set as fol-
lows: A1 = 1, R10 = 140 km, v10 = 900 m/s for Au1; A2 =
1, R20 = 140.015 km, v20 = 600 m/s for Au2; A3 = 1, R30 =
140.15 km, v30 = 600 m/s for Au3. Fig. 1 gives simulation
results of this example.
After the IFFT operation along the spatial frequency axis,
Fig. 1(a) gives the range cell–lag-time distribution. In Fig. 1(a),
due to the same velocity of Au2 and Au3, two inclined lines
appear, which correspond to the cross-term and are parallel to
the self-term of Au2 and Au3. Fig. 1(b) shows the result after
the FDDKT. It is obvious the self-term is corrected into bee-
lines, while the cross-term cannot be corrected by the FDDKT.
After performing the FFT operation along the lag-time axis in
Fig. 1(b), we obtain Fig. 1(c), where only the self-term accumu-
lates into sole peaks. Fig. 1(d) gives the stereogram of Fig. 1(c).
With the peak detection technique, we estimate the radial veloc-
ities as 900 and 600 m/s in Fig. 1(d). After the compensation of
the linear range migration with the estimated radial velocities,
these three targets can be detected with the CFAR technique.
Initial ranges of Au1, Au2, and Au3 are estimated as 140,
140.015, and 140.15 km, respectively.
With analyses and simulations above, we know that, when
vl0 = vq0 , the cross-term appears, while it cannot accumulate
288 IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 9, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016
Fig. 1. Simulation results of Example 1. (a) Contour of the range cell–
lag-time distribution. (b) Contour of the scaled range cell–lag-time distri-
bution. (c) Contour of the scaled range cell–Doppler frequency distribution.
(d) Stereogram of the scaled range cell–Doppler frequency distribution.
parametric symmetric autocorrela-
proposed detection algorithm is in
Fig. 2. Flowchart of the proposed detection algorithm.
as the self-term. Although the cross-term cannot accumulate as
the self-term when vl0 = vq0 , otherwise, the cross-term does
exist. For this situation, there are two cases: case I multitargets
with the same reflectivity and case II multitargets with different
reflectivities. For case I, although the cross-term exists, they
cannot accumulate as the self-term and influence the detection
of the self-term, just as Example 1. For case II, weak targets
may be submerged in the cross-term generated by strong targets
with the same velocity (velocities of weak targets are not equal
to the same velocity of strong targets). Under this situation, the
Clean technique [23] is suggested to be employed. Based on
analyses in this section, we employ a flowchart to show the prin-
ciple of the proposed algorithm in Fig. 2, where EH denotes the
threshold value determined via the CFAR technique.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on May 09,2022 at 06:39:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
III. A NALYSES OF THE P ROPOSED H IGH -S PEED TARGET
D ETECTION A LGORITHM
In Section II, a high-speed target detection algorithm is
proposed based on the parametric symmetric autocorrelation
function and the FDDKT. Similar to the SCIFT-based algo-
rithm, this proposed algorithm can also handle multicomponent
high-speed targets and eliminate the brute-force searching. In
this section, the computational cost (Section III-A), the anti-
noise performance (Section III-B), and the peak to sidelobe
ratio (Section III-C) will be analyzed for this proposed detec-
tion algorithm. The Hough transform [13]–[15], the KT-based
detection algorithm [21]–[24], and the SCIFT-based detection
algorithm [8] are chosen as references.
A. Analysis of the Computational Cost
For the Hough transform [13]–[15], the KT-based detection
algorithm [21]–[24], the SCIFT-based detection algorithm [8],
and the proposed detection algorithm, the difference is concen-
trated on the procedures of the motion parameter estimation
[8]. Thus, in this section, we only analyze the computational
cost of the motion parameter estimation. The Hough trans-
form only requires the addition operation and its computational
cost is low. However, the low-computational cost is at the
cost of a poor antinoise performance [13]–[15]. Therefore,
here, we only compare the computational cost of the proposed
detection algorithm with computational costs of the KT-based
detection algorithm [21]–[24] and the SCIFT-based detection
algorithm [8].
For the proposed detection algorithm, its main implementa-
tion procedures include
the
tion function [O NR Ntm 2 , where NR and Ntm denote the
range cell number and the effective integration pulses number,
respectively], the FDDKT [O (3Ntm NR log2 NR )] and the FFT
along the lag-time axis [O (NR Ntm log2 Ntm )]. Therefore, the
computational cost
of the
the order of O NR Ntm 2 . We have analyzed computational
costs of the KT-based detection algorithm and the SCIFT-
based detection algorithm in [8]. Thus, here, we just list their
computational costs in Table I.
From the Table I, we find that, the computational cost of the
proposed detection algorithm is the same as that of the SCIFT-
based detection algorithm and much smaller than that of the
KT-based detection algorithm. Thus, the proposed detection
algorithm inherits the computational advantage of the SCIFT-
based detection algorithm and is more suitable for realistic
applications than the KT-based detection algorithm. Moreover,
the proposed detection algorithm and the SCIFT-based detec-
tion algorithm eliminate the brute-force searching. Thus, com-
pared to the Hough transform and the KT-based detection
algorithm, the SCIFT-based detection algorithm, and the pro-
posed detection algorithm correspond to less complicated radar
systems [30], [31] and are more practical.
B. Analysis of the Antinoise Performance
In this section, according to analysis methods employed
in other detection algorithms [10]–[23], we utilize the
ZHENG et al.: RADAR HIGH-SPEED TARGET DETECTION BASED ON THE FDDKT
TABLE I
C OMPUTATIONAL C OST
K is the searching number of the unknown Doppler ambiguity integer for the traditional KT and is always large
for the high-speed target detection under the radar with the high carrier frequency and the low PRF [10].
Fig. 3. Antinoise performance. (a) Input–output SNR performance.
(b) Detection performance.
input–output SNR performance [8] and the detection per-
formance [25] to evaluate the antinoise performance of the
proposed coherent detection algorithm.
Example 2: In this synthetic radar data, a point target Bu is
used. Radar parameters are set as: the carrier frequency fc =
10 GHz, the bandwidth B = 18 MHz, the sample frequency
Fs = 20 MHz, the pulsewidth Tp = 10 µs, PRF = 2048 Hz,
and the number of effective integration pulses Ntm = 2048.
The motion parameters of Cu are set as follows: A = 1,
R0 = 70 km, v0 = 1200 m/s. This synthetic radar data (the
received radar signal) are contaminated with a zero-mean white
Gaussian noise and the input SNRs tested in Fig. 3 are SNRin =
[−55 : 1 : −20]. Fig. 3(a) and (b) shows the input–output SNR
performance and the detection performance under the false
alarm ratio pf = 10−6 , respectively. In Fig. 3, 100 trials are
performed for each SNRin value. Results of the ideal MTD
algorithm, which assume that the linear range migration has
been compensated, are also shown in solid line in Fig. 3.
According to [25] and [32], the input–output SNR perfor-
mance and the detection performance can determine the param-
eter estimation threshold SNR and the detection threshold SNR
under the CFAR, respectively. In Fig. 3(a), the input–output
SNR performance of the SCIFT-based detection algorithm is
better than that of the incoherent Hough transform (4 dB gain),
while it is worse than that of the coherent KT-based algo-
rithm (6 dB loss). We can obtain the evidence for this result
in [8]. According to analyses and simulations in [27]–[31], we
know that, compared to the autocorrelation function defined
in [8], the defined parametric symmetric autocorrelation func-
tion benefits the antinoise performance. Thus, in Fig. 3(a),
the proposed detection algorithm obtains a better input–output
SNR performance (1 dB gain) than the SCIFT-based detec-
tion algorithm. Fig. 3(b) gives the detection performance under
pf = 10−6 . Compared to the KT-based detection algorithm,
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on May 09,2022 at 06:39:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
289
the proposed detection algorithm has a 4-dB detection perfor-
mance loss, which is better than the 5-dB input–output SNR
performance loss in Fig. 3(a). The reason for this difference is
that the input–output SNR performance depends on the peak
detection [32], while the detection performance depends on
comparing the peak value with a threshold predetermined by the
CFAR and the corresponding SNR [25]. We also do simulations
under pf = 10−7 and pf = 10−9 . Compared to the KT-based
detection algorithm, the detection performance losses of the
proposed coherent detection algorithm are 3 and 2 dB under
pf = 10−7 and pf = 10−9 , respectively.
C. Analysis of the Peak to Sidelobe Ratio
In this section, the peak to sidelobe ratio, which plays an
important role to separate multicomponent targets with simi-
lar speeds along the scaled range cell or the Doppler frequency
[30], will be analyzed. The SCIFT-based detection algorithm,
which can also achieve a good balance between the com-
putational cost and the antinoise performance without the
brute-force searching procedure, is selected as the reference.
According to [30] and [31], Examples 3 and 4 are utilized to
show the superiority of the proposed detection algorithm on the
peak to sidelobe ratio.
Example 3: There is a point target Du in this synthetic radar
data. Radar parameters are set as: the carrier frequency fc =
10 GHz, the bandwidth B = 15 MHz, the sample frequency
Fs = 20 MHz, the pulsewidth Tp = 10 µs, PRF = 200 Hz, and
the number of effective integration pulses Ntm = 200. The
motion parameters are set as follows: A1 = 1, R10 = 80 km,
v10 = 300 m/s for Du. Fig. 4 gives simulation results of this
example.
Fig. 4(a) and (b) shows the spectral of the SCIFT-based
detection algorithm along the scaled range cell and the Doppler
frequency, respectively. Fig. 4(c) and (d) shows the spectral of
the proposed detection algorithm along the scaled range cell
and the Doppler frequency, respectively. According to analyses
and simulations in [27]–[31], compared to the symmetric auto-
correlation function employed in [8], the defined parametric
symmetric autocorrelation function benefits the peak to side-
lobe ratio. Thus, in Fig. 4, along the scaled range cell and
the Doppler frequency, peak to sidelobe ratios of the proposed
detection algorithm are higher than those of the SCIFT-based
detection algorithm. It is known that the peak to sidelobe ratio
plays an important role to separate multicomponent targets with
similar speeds along the scaled range cell and the Doppler fre-
quency. Therefore, the proposed detection algorithm will be
290 IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 9, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016
Fig. 4. Spectral of the SCIFT-based detection algorithm and the proposed
detection algorithm. (a) Spectral of the SCIFT-based detection algorithm along
the scaled range cell. (b) Spectral of the SCIFT-based detection algorithm along
the Doppler frequency. (c) Spectral of our proposed detection algorithm along
the scaled range cell. (d) Spectral of our proposed detection algorithm along the
Doppler frequency.
Fig. 5. Simulation results of Example 4. (a) Result of the SCIFT-based
detection algorithm. (b) Result of our proposed detection algorithm.
more practical than the SCIFT-based detection algorithm. In the
following, we will employ Example 4 to verify the practicabil-
ity of the proposed algorithm for realistic applications.
Example 4: There are four point targets Eu1, Eu2, Eu3,
and Eu4 in this synthetic radar data. Radar parameters are the
same as those in Example 3. The motion parameters are set
as follows: A1 = 1, R10 = 90 km, v10 = 300 m/s for Eu1;.
A2 = 1, R20 = 90.015 km, v20 = 315 m/s for Eu2; A3 = 1,
R30 = 90.15 km, v30 = 307.5 m/s for Eu3; A4 = 1, R40 =
90.03 km, v40 = 322.5 m/s for Eu4. Fig. 5 gives simulation
results of this example.
Fig. 5(a) gives the result of the SCIFT-based detection algo-
rithm. In Fig. 5(a), four peaks appear. However, only Eu2 and
Eu3 can be correctly detected with the peak detection tech-
nique. The low peak to sidelobe ratios of the SCIFT-based
detection algorithm induce spurious peaks in Fig. 5(a). The
result of the proposed detection algorithm is shown in Fig. 5(b).
Obviously, due to the high peak to sidelobe ratio, four targets,
Eu1, Eu2, Eu3, and Eu4, can be correctly detected with the
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on May 09,2022 at 06:39:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 6. Results of the SCIFT-based detection algorithm and the proposed detec-
tion algorithm. (a) Stereogram of the scaled range cell–Doppler frequency
distribution based on the SCIFT-based detection algorithm. (b) Result of the
SCIFT-based detection algorithm. (c) Stereogram of the scaled range cell–
Doppler frequency distribution based on the proposed detection algorithm.
(f) Result of the proposed detection algorithm.
peak detection technique. Results of Fig. 5 demonstrate that,
due to the higher peak to sidelobe ratio, the proposed detection
algorithm is more applicable for realistic applications than the
SCIFT-based detection algorithm.
IV. V ERIFICATION OF THE P ROPOSED D ETECTION
A LGORITHM
With analyses and simulations above, we know that, com-
pared to the Hough transform, the KT-based detection algo-
rithm and the SCIFT-based detection algorithm, the proposed
detection algorithm is more suitable for realistic applications.
In this section, the synthetic radar data (Section IV-A) and
the real radar data (Section IV-B) will be used to validate the
effectiveness of the proposed detection algorithm.
A. Verification With the Synthetic Radar Data
In this synthetic radar data, two point targets Bu1 and Bu2
are considered. Radar parameters are the same as those in
Example 2. The motion parameters are set as follows: A1 =
1, R10 = 60 km, v10 = 300 m/s for Bu1; A2 = 1, R20 =
60.15 km, v20 = 600 m/s for Bu2. This synthetic radar data
(the received signal) is contaminated with a zero-mean white
Gaussian noise and the SNR is −41 dB. Fig. 6 shows simula-
tion results with the SCIFT-based detection algorithm and the
proposed detection algorithm.
With the SCIFT-based detection algorithm, Fig. 6(a) gives
its corresponding scaled range cell–Doppler frequency distribu-
tion. Due to the low antinoise performance of the SCIFT-based
detection algorithm, we can only estimate radial velocities of
ZHENG et al.: RADAR HIGH-SPEED TARGET DETECTION BASED ON THE FDDKT
Fig. 7. Results after the pulse compression and the MTD algorithm. (a) Result
after the pulse compression. (b) Result after the MTD algorithm.
two spurious targets (480 and 645 m/s) with the peak detec-
tion technique [23]. With the estimated radial velocities, we
process the original signal as shown in Fig. 6(b). Obviously, lin-
ear range migrations of Bu1 and Bu2 cannot be compensated
with the estimated radial velocities and signal energies disperse
in Fig. 6(b). With the proposed detection algorithm, Fig. 6(c)
gives its corresponding scaled range cell–Doppler frequency
distribution. Compared to the SCIFT-based detection algorithm,
the proposed detection algorithm has a higher antinoise perfor-
mance. Thus, two targets, Bu1 and Bu2, appear in Fig. 6(c)
and their corresponding radial velocities can be estimated as
300 and 600 m/s correctly. With the estimated radial velocities,
we compensate linear range migrations of Bu1 and Bu2, and
accumulate the signal energy in Fig. 6(d). Due to the compensa-
tion of linear range migrations, two peaks, which corresponds to
Bu1 and Bu2, appear, and we can employ the CFAR technique
[8]–[10] to complete the target detection and the estimation of
initial ranges.
B. Verification With the Real Radar Data
In this section, we will use the real radar data to verify
the effectiveness of the proposed detection algorithm. The
real radar data is collected in February 2010 by the National
University of Defense Technology, Hunan, China. The radar
operates at the L wave band, the bandwidth B is 2 MHz, the
sample frequency Fs is 3.25 MHz, the pulsewidth Tp is 75 µs,
and the PRT is 910 µs. From the real radar data, we extract
910 effective integration pulses, where two passenger planes,
Targets 1 and 2, exist. Target 1 is flying away from the radar,
whereas Target 2 is approaching the radar. Fig. 7 gives results
after the pulse compression and the MTD algorithm.
Fig. 7(a) gives the result after the pulse compression.
Obviously, the linear range migration happens to these two pas-
senger planes. With the MTD algorithm, we have the result
shown in Fig. 7(b), where signal energies cannot be accumu-
lated due to linear range migrations. In order to compensate
linear range migrations induced by radial velocities, based on
the proposed detection algorithm, Fig. 8 gives the scaled range
cell–Doppler frequency distribution.
In Fig. 8, two peaks, which correspond to two passenger
planes, appear. With the peak detection technique [8], [23],
radial velocities of these two passenger planes can be esti-
mated as 230.75 m/s for Target 1 and −230.75 m/s for Target
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on May 09,2022 at 06:39:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
291
Fig. 8. Stereogram of the scaled range cell–Doppler frequency distribution
based on the proposed detection algorithm.
Fig. 9. Results after the MTD algorithm and the compensation with the pro-
posed detection algorithm. (a) Signal energy accumulation of Target 1 after
the MTD algorithm and the proposed detection algorithm. (b) Signal energy
accumulation of Target 2 after the MTD algorithm and the proposed detection
algorithm.
2. Thereafter, utilizing the estimated radial velocities, we com-
pensate linear range migrations of these two passenger planes
and accumulate their signal energies in Fig. 9. Results of the
MTD algorithm are also shown in Fig. 9. Obviously, due to
the compensation of the linear range migration, compared to the
MTD algorithm, the proposed detection algorithm can accumu-
late signal energies better in Fig. 9. In Fig. 9, we can complete
the target detection and the estimation of the initial range by the
CFAR technique [8].
V. C ONCLUSION
In this paper, by employing the parametric symmetric auto-
correlation function and the FDDKT, we propose a coherent
detection algorithm for the high-speed target, which is an
extension of the SCIFT-based detection algorithm. The defined
parametric symmetric autocorrelation function benefits the anti-
noise performance and the peak to sidelobe ratio. Thus, the
proposed detection algorithm not only inherits advantages of
the SCIFT-based detection algorithm, but also has a better anti-
noise performance and the higher peak to sidelobe ratio than
the SCIFT-based detection algorithm. Through simulations and
analyses of the synthetic data and the real radar data, we verify
the effectiveness of the proposed coherent detection algorithm.
292 IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 9, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016

A PPENDIX Performing the addition operation along the tm -axis of

In this appendix, the cross-term of the proposed detection Rl,q,cross (f, tm , τm ), we can obtain
 
algorithm will be analyzed. Here, two high-speed targets l ∈ f
Rl,q,cross,A (f, τm ) = 2Gl,q Acl Acq rect
[1, N − 1] and q ∈ [l + 1, N ] in the spatial frequency domain γTp
are denoted as  
2vl0
· exp −j2π f (τm + a) exp [−j2πfd0l (τm + a)]
c
     
f 2Rl0 2Rl0 − 2Rq0
Cl,q (f, tm ) = Acl rect exp −j2πfc · cos 2π (f + fc ) (13)
γTp c c
   
2Rl0 2vl0 tm
· exp −j2πf exp −j2πf exp(−j2πfd0l tm) where Gl,q denotes the gain after the addition operation along
c c
      the tm -axis.
f 2Rq0 2Rq0 After the FDDKT operation, the signal in (13) can be
+ Acq rect exp −j2πfc exp −j2πf
γTp c c represented as
   
2vq0 tm
f(τm +a)
· exp −j2πf exp (−j2πfd0q tm ) . (10) Rl,q,cross,key f(τm +a) , τm = 2Gl,q Acl Acq rect
c γTp
 
2vl0
· exp −j2π f(τm +a) exp [−j2πfd0l (τm + a)]
hc
Performing the parametric symmetric autocorrelation func-   
tion to (10), we can obtain the cross-term as 2Rl0 − 2Rq0 f(τm +a)
· cos 2π + fc . (14)
c h (τm + a)
 Equation (14) can be decomposed into two parts
f  
Rl,q,cross (f, tm , τm ) = 2Acl Acq rect
f(τm +a)
γTp Rl,q,cross,key,1 f(τm +a) , τm = 2Gl,q Acl Acq rect
    γTp
2vl0 2vq0  
· exp −jπ + f (τm + a) 2vl0
c c · exp −j2π f(τm +a) exp [−j2πfd0l (τm + a)]
· exp [−jπ (fd0l + fd0q ) (τm + a)] hc
   (14a)
2Rl0 + 2vl0 tm 2Rq0 + 2vq0 tm
· cos 2π (f + fc ) − .

c c Rl,q,cross,key,2 f(τm +a) , τm

  
(11) 2Rl0 − 2Rq0 f(τm +a)
= cos 2π + fc . (14b)
c h (τm + a)

Obviously, for these two high-speed targets, differences in For these two parts, we perform the IFFT and the FFT with
initial ranges and radial velocities disturb the energy accumu- respect to f(τm +a) and τm , respectively,
lation of the cross-term in (11). Here, based on characteristics

Ql,q,cross,1 t̂(τm +a) , fτm

of Rl,q,cross (f, tm , τm ), we discuss two cases, vl0 = vq0 and    
vl0 = vq0 . f(τm +a)
= FFTτm IFFTf(τm +a) 2Gl,q Acl Acq rect
Case 1: vl0 = vq0 γTp
  
In (11), if vl0 = vq0 , the frequency
 of 2vl0
2R +2v · exp −j2π f(τm +a) exp [−j2πfd0l (τm + a)]
cos 2π(f + fc ) 2Rl0 +2v hc
t
l0 tm
− q0 c q0 m is not zero.
c   
After the addition operation along the tm -axis of Rl,q,cross 2vl0
= Al,q,1 sinc B t̂(τm +a) −
(f, tm , τm ), Rl,q,cross,A (f, τm ) = 0. Thus, under this sit- hc
uation, the cross-term
of the proposed detection algorithm × δ (fτm + fd0l ) exp (−j2πafd0l )
Ql,q.cross t̂(τm +a) , fτm is zero.
Case 2: vl0 = vq0 (15)
For this case, (11) can be rewritten as 

Ql,q,cross,2 t̂(τm +a) , fτm = FFTτm IFFTf(τm +a)

     
f 2Rl0 − 2Rq0 f(τm +a)
Rl,q,cross (f, tm , τm ) = 2Acl Acq rect × cos 2π + fc
γTp c h (τm + a)
 
2vl0 2Rl0 − 2Rq0
· exp −j2π f (τm + a) exp [−j2πfd0l (τm + a)] = 2 exp (j2πafτm )
c t̂(τm +a) hc
    
2Rl0 − 2Rq0 2Rl0 − 2Rq0 f τm
· cos 2π (f + fc ) . × cos 2π + fc
c c
(16)
(12) ht̂(τm +a)

Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on May 09,2022 at 06:39:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
ZHENG et al.: RADAR HIGH-SPEED TARGET DETECTION BASED ON THE FDDKT
where Al,q,1 denotes the amplitude after the IFFT and the FFT
operations.
Combining (15) and (16) and utilizing the two-dimensional
(2-D) convolution method [30], we can obtain the cross-term as
pp. 683–686, Oct. 2008.
Ql,q.cross t̂(τm +a) , fτm
293
[18] T. J. Abatzoglou and G. O. Gheen, “Range, radial velocity, and acceler-
ation MLE using radar LFM pulse train,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron.
Syst., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 1070–1084, Oct. 1998.
[19] J. Zeng, Z. He, S. Mathini, and H. Liu, “Modified Hough transform for
searching radar detection,” IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens. Lett., vol. 5, no. 4,
[20] J. Carretero-Moya, J. Gismero-Menoyo, A. Asensio-Lopez, and

 A. Blancodel-Campo, “A coherent Radon transform for small target
= FFTτm IFFTf(τm +a) Rl,q,cross,key f(τm +a) , τm
2Rl0 − 2Rq0
= Al,q,1
2 exp (j2πafτm ) Int. Radar Conf., 2006, pp. 1–4.
t̂(τm +a) − 2vhcl0 hc
  
2Rl0 − 2Rq0 fτm + fd0l
· cos 2π
+ fc . Lett., vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 18–22, Jan. 2007.
c h t̂(τm +a) − 2vhcl0
(17)
Above is the derivation of Lemma in Section II.
R EFERENCES
[1] E. J. Kelly, “The radar measurement of range, velocity and acceleration,”
IRE Trans. Mil. Electron., vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 51–57, Apr. 1961.
[2] E. J. Kelly and R. P. Wishner, “Matched-filter theory for high-velocity,
speed accelerating targets,” IEEE Trans. Mil. Electron., vol. 9, no. 1,
pp. 56–59, Jan. 1965.
[3] P. Swerling, “Detection of radar echoes in noise revisited,” IEEE Trans.
Inf. Theory, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 348–361, Jul. 1966.
[4] R. J. Purdy, P. E. Blankenship, C. E. Muehe, C. M. Rader, E. Stern, and
R. C. Williamson, “Radar signal processing,” Lincoln Lab. J., vol. 12,
no. 2, pp. 297–320, 2000.
[5] D. Orlando, L. Venturino, M. Lops, and G. Ricci, “Track-before-detect
strategies for STAP radars,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 58, no. 2,
pp. 933–938, Feb. 2010.
[6] X. Chen, J. Guan, Y. Huang, N. Liu, and Y. He, “Radon-linear canonical
ambiguity function-based detection and estimation method for marine tar-
get with micromotion,” IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., vol. 53, no. 4,
pp. 2225–2240, Apr. 2015.
[7] X. Li, G. Cui, W. Yi, and L. Kong, “A fast maneuvering target motion
parameters estimation algorithm based on ACCF,” IEEE Signal Process.
Lett., vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 270–274, Mar. 2015.
[8] J. Zheng, T. Su, W. Zhu, X. He, and Q. Liu, “Radar high-speed target
detection based on the scaled inverse Fourier transform,” IEEE J. Sel.
Topics Appl. Earth Observ. Remote Sens., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1108–1119,
Mar. 2015.
[9] J. Xu, X. Xiang, S. Peng, J. Yu, Y. Peng, and L. Qian, “Radar maneuvering
target motion estimation based on generalized Radon-Fourier transform,”
IEEE Trans. Signal Process., vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 6190–6201, Dec. 2012.
[10] M. Xing, J. Su, G. Wang, and Z. Bao, “New parameter estimation and
detection algorithm for high speed small target,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst., vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 214–224, Jan. 2011.
[11] J. Carretero-Moya, J. Gismero-Menoyo, A. Asensio-Lopez, and
A. Blancodel-Campo, “Application of the radon transform to detect
small-targets in sea clutter,” IET Radar Sonar Navigat., vol. 3, no. 2,
pp. 155–166, Apr. 2009.
[12] R. Sharif and A. Saman, “Efficient wideband signal parameter estimation
using a Radon-ambiguity transform slice,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron.
Syst., vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 673–688, Apr. 2007.
[13] B. D. Carlson, E. D. Evance, and S. L. Wilson, “Search radar detection
and track with the Hough transform part I: System concept,” IEEE Trans.
Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 102–108, Nov. 1994.
[14] B. D. Carlson, E. D. Evance, and S. L. Wilson, “Search radar detection
and track with the Hough transform part I: Detection statistic,” IEEE
Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 109–115, Nov. 1994.
[15] B. D. Carlson, E. D. Evance, and S. L. Wilson, “Search radar detection
and track with the Hough transform part I: Detection performance with
binary integration,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp. Electron. Syst., vol. 30, no. 1,
pp. 116–125, Nov. 1994.
[16] J. Xu, J. Yu, Y. Peng, and X. Xia, “Radon-Fourier transform for radar
detection, I: Generalized Doppler filter bank,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst., vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 1186–1200, Jul. 2011.
[17] J. Xu, J. Yu, Y. Peng, and X. Xia, “Radon-Fourier transform for radar
detection, II: Blind speed sidelobe suppression,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst., vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 2473–2489, Jul. 2011.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on May 09,2022 at 06:39:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
detection,” in Proc. IEEE Radar Conf., 2009, pp. 1–4.
[21] Y. Li, T. Zeng, T. Long, and Z. Wang, “Range migration compensation
and Doppler ambiguity resolution by keystone transform,” in Proc. IEEE
[22] D. Zhu, Y. Li, and Z. Zhu, “A keystone transform without interpolation
for SAR ground moving-target imaging,” IEEE Geosci. Remote Sens.
[23] J. Su, M. Xing, G. Wang, and Z. Bao, “High-speed multi-target detection
with narrowband radar,” IET Radar Sonar Navigat., vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 595–
603, Aug. 2010.
[24] G. Sun, M. Xing, X. Xia, Y. Wu, and Z. Bao, “Robust ground moving-
target imaging using Deramp-Keystone processing,” IEEE Trans. Geosci.
Remote Sens., vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 966–982, Oct. 2013.
[25] J. Yu, J. Xu, Y. Peng, and X. Xia, “Radon-Fourier transform for radar
detection, III: Optimality and fast implementations,” IEEE Trans. Aerosp.
Electron. Syst., vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 991–1004, Jul. 2012.
[26] Z. Wu, W. Fu, T. Su, and J. Zheng, “High speed radar target detection
based on the fast Radon-Fourier transform,” J. Electron. Inf. Technol.,
vol. 34, no. 8, pp. 1866–1871, 2012.
[27] M. Xing, R. Wu, Y. Li, and Z. Bao, “New ISAR imaging algorithm based
on modified Wigner Ville distribution,” IET Radar Sonar Navigat., vol. 3,
no. 1, pp. 70–80, Feb. 2009.
[28] X. Lv, M. Xing, C. Wang, and S. Zhang “ISAR imaging of maneuver-
ing targets based on the range centroid Doppler technique,” IEEE Trans.
Image Process., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 141–153, Jan. 2010.
[29] X. Lv, M. Xing, S. Zhang, and Z. Bao, “Keystone transform of the
Wigner-Ville distribution for analysis of multicomponent LFM signals,”
Signal Process., vol. 89, no. 5, pp. 791–806, 2009.
[30] X. Lv, G. Bi, C. Wang, and M. Xing, “Lv’s distribution: Principle, imple-
mentation, properties, and performance,” IEEE Trans. Signal Process.,
vol. 59, no. 8, pp. 3576–3591, Aug. 2011.
[31] S. Luo, G. Bi, X. Lv, and F. Hu, “Performance analysis on Lv distribution
and its applications,” Digital Signal Process., vol. 23, no. 3, pp. 797–807,
2013.
Jibin Zheng was born in Zibo, Shandong, China,
in 1986. He received the B.S. degree in electronic
information science and technology from Shandong
Normal University, Jinan, China, in 2009, and the
Ph.D. degree in signal and information processing
from Xidian University, Xi’an, China, in 2015.
Since 2015, he has been a Faculty with the
National Laboratory of Radar Signal Processing,
Xidian University. From September 2012 to
September 2014, he worked as a Visiting Ph.D. at
the Department of Electrical Engineering, Duke
University, Durham, NC, USA, under the financial support from the China
Scholarship Council. His research interests include synthetic aperture radar
(SAR) and inverse SAR signal processing, cognitive radar, time–frequency
analysis, FPGA IP design and system-on-chip (SoC) design.
Tao Su received the B.S. degree in information the-
ory, the M.S. degree in mobile communication, and
the Ph.D. degree in signal and information processing
from Xidian University, Xi’an, China, in 1990, 1993,
and 1999, respectively.
Since 1993, he has been a Faculty with Xidian
University, where he is currently a Professor with
the National Laboratory of Radar Signal Processing,
Xidian University. His research interests include
high-speed real-time signal processing on radar,
sonar, and telecommunications, digital signal pro-
cessing, parallel processing system design, and FPGA IP design.
294 IEEE JOURNAL OF SELECTED TOPICS IN APPLIED EARTH OBSERVATIONS AND REMOTE SENSING, VOL. 9, NO. 1, JANUARY 2016
Hongwei Liu (M’04) received the M.Eng. and
Ph.D. degrees in electronic engineering from Xidian
University, Xi’an, China, in 1995 and 1999, respec-
tively.
Currently, he is a Professor with the National
Laboratory of Radar Signal Processing, Xidian
University, and the Director of this laboratory. From
2001 to 2002, he was a Visiting Scholar at the
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
Duke University, Durham, NC, USA. His research
interests include radar signal processing, radar auto-
matic target recognition (RATR), adaptive signal processing, and cognitive
radar.
Guisheng Liao (M’96) was born in Guangxi.
He received the B.S. degree in mathematics from
Guangxi University, Guangxi, China, in 1985, and the
M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in signal and information pro-
cessing from Xidian University, Xian, China, in 1990
and 1992, respectively.
Currently, he is a Professor with the National
Laboratory of Radar Signal Processing, Xidian
University. He has been a Senior Visiting Scholar
at Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong.
His research interests include array signal process-
ing, space–time adaptive processing, SAR ground moving target indication, and
distributed small satellite SAR system design.
Dr. Liao is a member of the National Outstanding Person and the Cheung
Kong Scholars in China.
Authorized licensed use limited to: Viettel Group. Downloaded on May 09,2022 at 06:39:31 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Zheng Liu was born in 1964. He received the B.S.
degree in radio technology from Shaanxi Institute of
Technology, Xi’an, China, in 1985, and the M.S. and
Ph.D. degrees in signal and information processing
from Xidian University, Xi’an, China, in 1991 and
2000, respectively.
He is currently a Professor, Doctoral Director, and
the Vice Director of the National Laboratory of Radar
Signal Processing, Xidian University. His research
interests include the theory and system design of
radar signal processing, precision guiding technol-
ogy, and multisensor data fusion.
Qing Huo Liu (S’88–M’89–SM’94–F’05) received
the B.S. and M.S. degrees in physics from Xiamen
University, Xiamen, China, in 1983 and 1986, respec-
tively, and the Ph.D. degree in electrical engineering
from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Champaign, IL, USA, in 1989.
He was with the Electromagnetics Laboratory,
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, as
a Research Assistant from September 1986 to
December 1988, and as a Postdoctoral Research
Associate from January 1989 to February 1990. He
was a Research Scientist and a Program Leader with Schlumberger-Doll
Research, Cambridge, MA, USA, from 1990 to 1995. From 1996 to May 1999,
he was an Associate Professor with New Mexico State University, Albuquerque,
NM, USA. Since June 1999, he has been with Duke University, Durham, NC,
USA, where he is now a Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering. He
is also a Visiting Professor at UESTC, Chengdu, China. His research interests
include computational electromagnetics and acoustics, inverse problems, geo-
physical subsurface sensing, biomedical imaging, electronic packaging, and the
simulation of photonic and nanodevices.