{"title":"Effect of CW and pulse jamming on direct-sequence spread-spectrum code acquisition using a sequential detector","authors":"K. Ravi, R. Ormondroyd","doi":"10.1109/MILCOM.1992.244151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The authors use a Monte-Carlo computer simulation to examine the effect of continuous-wave (CW) and pulse jamming, in the presence of additive Gaussian noise, on the acquisition performance of a noncoherent serial-search pseudonoise code synchronizer. The acquisition performances of three variants of the sequential detector, namely, the quantized log-likelihood detector, the biased square-law detector, and the ideal log-likelihood detector, are compared, and the degradation in performance is assessed. It is shown that, in the presence of Gaussian noise, the pulse jammer with a properly chosen duty factor can significantly degrade the acquisition performance compared to the CW jammer. Further, the pulsed jammer with a duty factor approaches 1.0 behaves similarly to the CW jammer at values of jammer-to-signal (J/S) less than 5 dB.<<ETX>>","PeriodicalId":394587,"journal":{"name":"MILCOM 92 Conference Record","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1992-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MILCOM 92 Conference Record","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/MILCOM.1992.244151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11
Abstract
The authors use a Monte-Carlo computer simulation to examine the effect of continuous-wave (CW) and pulse jamming, in the presence of additive Gaussian noise, on the acquisition performance of a noncoherent serial-search pseudonoise code synchronizer. The acquisition performances of three variants of the sequential detector, namely, the quantized log-likelihood detector, the biased square-law detector, and the ideal log-likelihood detector, are compared, and the degradation in performance is assessed. It is shown that, in the presence of Gaussian noise, the pulse jammer with a properly chosen duty factor can significantly degrade the acquisition performance compared to the CW jammer. Further, the pulsed jammer with a duty factor approaches 1.0 behaves similarly to the CW jammer at values of jammer-to-signal (J/S) less than 5 dB.<>