MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1512192239 · doi:10.1029/2012gl051288

Retrievals of sea surface temperature fronts from SAR imagery

2012· article· en· W1512192239 on OpenAlexaff
Hailan Kuang, William Perrie, Tao Xie, Biao Zhang, Wei Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologySynthetic aperture radarRemote sensingCurl (programming language)Sea surface temperatureWind stressAltimeterGaussianDivergence (linguistics)Image resolutionWind speedMeteorologyGeodesyClimatologyComputer scienceOceanographyGeographyArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a new methodology to identify SST fronts of the Gulf Stream, using linear relationships between sea surface temperature (SST) gradients, and curl and divergence of wind stress fields, derived from high resolution (1 km) SAR data. The new approach uses a composite metric determined from the wind stress divergence and curl fields from individual SAR images. Multi‐stage spatial filtering, Wiener and Gaussian low‐pass filters, and a statistically‐based high pass spatial filter are applied to the derived wind stress curl and divergence fields. Results are significantly improved by restricting SAR imagery to cases where wind speed is less than 12 m/s, thus removing strong wind shear fronts. The method is demonstrated with SAR images of the Gulf Stream and has potential to be applied in near real time operations. The advantages of SAR imagery over optical sensors are its independence of cloud or night‐time conditions and high accuracy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research LettersSame topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207