Based on the study of several existing evaluation criteria for electronic interference effects, this paper conducts an in-depth analysis of the characteristics of each criterion. The power criterion and information criterion are applied to evaluate suppressive and deceptive interference, respectively, while the probability criterion is used in specific systems. Compared to efficiency criteria, these methods offer a more comprehensive assessment of both anti-jamming capability and system performance.
Keywords: electronic interference; effect evaluation; electronic countermeasure
In a complex electromagnetic environment, high-tech electronic warfare is expected to become the core of future conflicts. Assessing the effectiveness of jamming is a critical issue in electronic countermeasures and plays a key role in the development of related equipment. It provides objective and accurate estimates of system performance, helping to improve interference or anti-interference capabilities.
Electronic interference effects refer to the combined impact on electronic devices, detection systems, and operators caused by interference with other electronic systems. When an electronic system is subjected to interference, the effect can be measured by the degree of damage, the level of disruption, and the harm experienced by the operator. For instance, if the locking probability of a detecting device is reduced below a certain threshold, or if the tracking error exceeds the expected limit, or if the error rate surpasses a given threshold, such interference is considered effective. Effective interference indicates whether the interference has successfully disrupted the target system.
Various evaluation criteria have been proposed in the field of electronic interference, including the power criterion, information criterion, probability criterion, and efficiency criterion. These criteria are tailored based on the type of interference signal and the specific electronic system being targeted. Some are based on different anti-jamming measures, others on practical engineering considerations, while some are grounded in theoretical models. However, there is currently no universally accepted standard that can consistently achieve desired results in real-world applications. This is because the existing criteria depend on the attributes of the electronic countermeasures system, project objectives, and prior knowledge from actual operations, leading to varying perspectives among different criteria.
Therefore, this paper thoroughly analyzes and discusses each criterion, clarifies its attributes and applicable scenarios, and provides a useful reference for selecting appropriate evaluation methods in real-world electronic countermeasures.
1. Power Criteria and Information Guidelines
Based on the effectiveness of anti-jamming measures in electronic countermeasures systems, researchers have developed the power criterion and information criterion. The power criterion evaluates how effectively a system can suppress interference, or how much error or loss occurs in the information obtained after interference. This is typically reflected through the suppression coefficient, which is the ratio of the minimum interference signal power threshold to the power of the electronic countermeasure signal when it receives the information.
When an interference signal disrupts an electronic system, significant loss of effective information may occur. Common methods include signal deviation, active simulation, transmission of disturbed segments, and signal coverage. If the characteristics of the interfered system match those of the interference signal, the amount of information lost is greater. Conversely, if they do not match, the information loss is minimal or even non-existent. Thus, the effectiveness of interference depends on the specific type of electronic countermeasure involved.
The power criterion, also known as the signal-to-noise ratio criterion, is expressed through the suppression coefficient K. It represents the ratio between the minimum interference power Pj at the receiver input and the target echo signal power Ps at the input of the electronic countermeasure system. According to the formula, a higher suppression coefficient indicates stronger interference, while a lower coefficient suggests weaker interference. This makes the suppression coefficient a reliable indicator of the system’s resistance to interference, particularly suitable for evaluating suppressive interference.
Currently, the power criterion is the most widely used method for assessing anti-jamming performance. Its key features include:
(1) It reflects the minimum interference-to-signal ratio required to achieve a certain level of interference effect. While this is abstract, it is more suitable for evaluating the anti-jamming capability of the system.
(2) Accurate measurement of the suppression coefficient in practical applications is challenging, making it less ideal for real-world use.
(3) The power criterion is primarily suited for evaluating the effectiveness of suppressive interference in electronic countermeasure systems.
Evaluating interference effects from the perspective of information loss leads to the information criterion. The basic idea is to assess the impact of interference by comparing the amount of target information before and after the interference. For example, changes in the observation space can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the interference. In some technical specifications of electronic interference devices, the efficiency criterion is also used to describe the interference effect.
The egot vape pen is included with the CE4 atomizer tank; an upgraded version of the eGo-w. The included CE4 atomizer tank is a transparent vape tank which holds the eliquid and is made to be easy refilled directly from your E-Juice bottle or by using a squeezable needle tip bottle.The most favorited accessory is an optional needle tip bottle to go with this eGo Vaporizer; it makes refilling liquid a breeze and is a favorite accessory among customers.
The included CE4 tanks is easy to fill and holds approximately 2ml of E-Liquid; 100% refillable over and over, its excellent for use throughout the day and the 2ml of vape juice lasts quite some time when fully filled.
Rechargeable Vape Pen Kit,Rechargeable Oil Pod Disposable Pod,Best Rechargeable Disposable Vape Pen,Rechargeable Vape Battery Auto-Draw Vape Pen
Shenzhen Essenvape Technology Co., Ltd. , https://www.essenvape.com