source knowledge are utilized. In the first, the upward-looking measurements of the RAS antenna are augmented with measurements from a “reference antenna” directed toward the source. This latter antenna observes RFI sources at a higher signal-to-noise ratio, which allows better estimation of RFI source properties in the cancellation process. A second approach is utilized for RFI sources with known modulations, for which a demodulation process can increase the signal-to-noise ratio. Given either a demodulation or second antenna measurement, cancellation then involves an estimation and subtraction of RFI source contributions to the data. The latter can be performed either “precorrelation” or “postcorrelation”—that is, either before or after the spatial covariance matrix is formed in an interferometric system. Cancellation performance is limited by the extent to which RFI sources can be detected and successfully estimated (a function of the signal-to-noise ratio at which the RFI sources are observed) as well as by the complexity and any temporal evolution of the RFI environment in which the observations occur.

Unilateral Mitigation Successes and Limitations

Table 4.2 above provides a short summary of the successes and limitations of the unilateral mitigation methods that have been employed to date by the EESS.

Finding: While unilateral radio frequency interference mitigation techniques are a potentially valuable means of facilitating spectrum sharing, they are not a substitute for primary allocated passive spectrum and the enforcement of regulations.


The unilateral mitigation techniques described in §4.3 are at best a short-term solution to the RFI problem, which can be effective only when spectral occupancy is low and the RFI is easily distinguished from the background. This approach is otherwise inherently limited by the lack of coordination with the active services, and using only this approach, science users would perpetually be “guessing” how to work around RFI. This tactic will soon find its limits given the trends described in §4.1. A far more effective and efficient approach would be bilateral, or cooperative, mitigation.

Cooperative mitigation techniques would coordinate the timing and regional use of the radio spectrum in a far more dynamic manner than has existed with past technologies and regulatory structures. This is a new approach by which active services cooperate with passive (science) services within shared spectral bands by briefly interrupting or synchronizing radio transmissions to accommodate the science measurements. Such accommodations would occur only when and where those science observations are needed (e.g., during a satellite overpass), so the

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement