ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Classification of Flying Drones Using Millimeter-Wave Radar: Comparative Analysis of Algorithms Under Noisy Conditions.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modular Performance Analysis of a Cascaded TDM-MIMO FMCW Radar for Short-Range Counter-UAV Sensing.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Radar UAV/Bird Trajectory Feature Classification Based on TCN-Transformer and the PC-TimeGAN Data Augmentation Framework.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Rotor-Body Echo Separation Using a Cyclic-Power-Guided Soft Mask from UAV Radar Signals.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study evaluates different machine learning algorithms in detecting and identifying drones using radar data from a 60 GHz millimeter-wave sensor. These signals were collected from a bionic bird and two drones, namely DJI Mavic and DJI Phantom 3 Pro, which were represented in complex form to preserve amplitude and phase information. The first benchmarks used four algorithms, namely long short-term memory (LSTM), gated recurrent unit (GRU), one-dimensional convolutional neural network (Conv1D), and Transformer, and they were benchmarked for robustness under noisy conditions, including artificial noise types like white noise, Pareto noise, impulsive noise, and multipath interference. As expected, Transformer outperformed other algorithms in terms of accuracy, even on noisy data; however, in certain noise contexts, particularly Pareto noise, it showed weaknesses. For this purpose, we propose Multimodal Transformer, which incorporates more statistical features-skewness and kurtosis-in addition to amplitude and phase data. This resulted in a improvement in detection accuracy, even under difficult noise conditions. Our results demonstrate the importance of noise in processing radar signals and the benefits afforded by a multimodal presentation of data in detecting unmanned aerial vehicle and birds. This study sets up a benchmark for state-of-the-art machine learning methodologies for radar-based detection systems, providing valuable insight into methods of increasing the robustness of algorithms to environmental noise.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.