half of suraj hanchinal <
>>> surajhanchi...@gmail.com>
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, March 25, 2018 7:36 PM
>>> *To:* jmfriedt
>>> *Cc:* mar...@gnuradio.org; discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] [GSoC2018] Adding Passive radar and
>
7:36 PM
>> *To:* jmfriedt
>> *Cc:* mar...@gnuradio.org; discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] [GSoC2018] Adding Passive radar and
>> multiple device support to gr-radar toolbox
>>
>> Hello everyone,
>> After reading the suggestions as well
jhanchi...@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Sunday, March 25, 2018 7:36 PM
> *To:* jmfriedt
> *Cc:* mar...@gnuradio.org; discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] [GSoC2018] Adding Passive radar and
> multiple device support to gr-radar toolbox
>
> Hello everyone
ces+ben.alex=outlook@gnu.org>
on behalf of suraj hanchinal <surajhanchi...@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2018 7:36 PM
To: jmfriedt
Cc: mar...@gnuradio.org; discuss-gnuradio@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] [GSoC2018] Adding Passive radar and multiple
device support to gr-radar to
Hello everyone,
After reading the suggestions as well as feedback from Marcus Muller and
Martin Braun, I have made the suggested changes as well as explained the
algorithms in greater detail. Please read the updated proposal and provide
feedback and suggestions.
Thanking you,
Regards,
Suraj
Hello Jean-Michel Friedt,
Thank you for your valuable feedback. That is a very good insight since I
overlooked the cross-ambiguity function and its calculation considering
them trivial. I will definitely look into the papers that you mentioned and
include them in my proposal.
Thank you,
> All in all, this is pretty ambitious, but exciting!
> How will you tackle the OFDM signal recovery? I think your reference
> [2] is really much to be completely done in one GSoC, so it would be
> totally OK to say you just picked a reduced approach. Still, if you
> want to do that in all its
Apologies everyone. I forgot to link the proposal below. Here is the
proposal.
GSoC proposal :
https://github.com/surajhanchinal/GSoC_proposal/blob/master/My%20GSoC%20Proposal.pdf
Thank you.
Regards,
Suraj Hanchinal
On Sun, Mar 25, 2018 at 1:23 AM, suraj hanchinal
Hi Martin
Thank you Martin for the suggestions. You are right about the vagueness. I
was not able to properly communicate all the ideas in my head. I have
actually thought about the clutter removal algorithms and have updated the
proposal with the same. As you and Marcus said, the schedule was way
On 03/23/2018 11:26 AM, Müller, Marcus (CEL) wrote:
> Hi Suraj,
>
> thank you very much for sending us your proposal! This already looks
> very nice. Can I wish for you to add something like a rough block
> diagram that describes how your simulated illuminator, your signal
> recoverer, your
Hi Suraj,
thank you very much for sending us your proposal! This already looks
very nice.
Can I wish for you to add something like a rough block diagram that
describes how your simulated illuminator, your signal recoverer, your
radar estimator and your clutter reducer work together, and which
Hello Everyone,
I am Suraj Hanchinal, a second year undergraduate in Electrical Engineering
at the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur. I had approached the mailing
list and communicated with Martin Braun, the mentor and others regarding
the gr-radar toolbox extension idea. I decided to work on
12 matches
Mail list logo