MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1533805592 · doi:10.1155/2016/2750862

GNSS-R Delay-Doppler Map Simulation Based on the 2004 Sumatra-Andaman Tsunami Event

2015· article· en· W1533805592 on OpenAlexafffund
Qingyun Yan, Weimin Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sensors · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGNSS applicationsScatteringGeologyDoppler effectGeodesySeismologyRemote sensingSatellitePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new method for simulating Global Navigation Satellite System-Reflectometry (GNSS-R) delay-Doppler maps (DDMs) of a tsunami-dominant sea surface is presented. In this method, the bistatic scattering Z-V model, the sea surface mean square slope model of Cox and Munk, and the tsunami-induced wind perturbation model are employed. The feasibility of the Cox and Munk model under a tsunami scenario is examined by comparing the Cox and Munk model based scattering coefficient with the Jason-1 measurement. A good consistency between these two results is obtained with a correlation coefficient of 0.93. After confirming the applicability of the Cox and Munk model for a tsunami-dominated sea, this study provides the simulations of the scattering coefficient distribution and the corresponding DDMs of a fixed region of interest before and during the tsunami. In the final analysis, by subtracting the simulation results that are free of tsunami from those with presence of tsunami, the tsunami-induced variations in scattering coefficients and DDMs can be clearly observed. As a result, the tsunami passage can be readily interpreted.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of SensorsSame topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207