Nonparametric spatial analysis for mine line detection (2009)

The development of tools for automated analysis of data collected for mine countermeasures (MCM) search, classify and map (SCM) has predominantly focused on automated target recognition for individual mines. As MCM target detection becomes more automated, detecting spatial patterns in the positioning of mines should follow. Natural restrictions on mine deployment such as depth and bottom contour as well as mine deployment methodology and protocol effectively create mine line patterns that are typical to coastal areas. We have developed a mine line detection algorithm that uses nonparametric spatial analysis to identify mine-like contacts (MLCs) that fit into mine line patterns dictated by standard mine laying protocol in coastal regions. In general, a set of MLCs reported from a mine detection sensor will consist of both actual mines and false alarms; the algorithm classifies every MLC in this set into one of three classes: fixed - the MLC?fits into a mine line pattern with fixed mine spacing; random -the MLC?fits into a mine line pattern with random mine spacing; or false alarm-?-the MLC?does not fit into a mine line pattern and is subsequently not considered a mine. The latest version of the algorithm utilizes nonparametric techniques and requires no knowledge of either the detection sensor's probability of detection (P <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">d</sub> ) or probability of false alarm (P <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">fa</sub> ). A nonparametric anomaly detector first identifies regions with unusually high MLC density for more detailed analysis. Suspected regions are subsequently analyzed for unusually regular patterns of MLCs. The probabilities that the observed target densities and target patterns could occur simply by chance are estimated by comparison with results from nearby areas using basic information about mine deployment. To ensure that a mine line's full extent is captured, the algorithm attempts to grow a line after it is detected. And a more detailed probability analysis distinguishes random mine lines from fixed-spaced mine lines. Extensive Matlab simulations characterize the algorithm's performance across a wide range of operating environments and simulated minefield configurations. In total, ten replications each of 1,367 different configurations have been evaluated. These configurations include three different water depths (10 ft., 6 ft. and 200 ft.), six false notional alarm rates (1, 2,5,10,15 and 20 false alarms per sq. NM), three false alarm distributions (uniform, sloped, and striped), three sensor probabilities of detections (0.4, 0.6 and 0.9), three target confidence scores (0.6,0.8 and 1.0) and four false alarm confidence scores (0.5, 0.6, 0.8 and 1.0). The range of simulation parameters was selected in part as an attempt to push the algorithm past its acceptable performance limits. However, the algorithm performed remarkably well even under the worst conditions. For MLC sets with false alarm rates as high as 20 per square nautical mile, the algorithm correctly classifies over 98% of the MLCs as mines and detects 97% of the mine lines. Furthermore, it reduces the false alarm rate from 20 to 0.2 per square nautical mile with a false mine line rate of 0.14 false lines per square nautical mile. The algorithm achieves even lower false alarm rates when the initial false alarm rate is less than 20. The automated mine line detection discovers many obscure lines that are virtually undetectable to the naked eye.