MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

ESTABLISHING CROP PRODUCTIVITY USING RADARSAT-2

2012· article· en· W1969324693 on OpenAlexaffabout
Heather McNairn, Jiali Shang, X. Jiao, Benjamin Deschamps

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeaf area indexEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarGrowing seasonCloud coverAgronomyGeographyCloud computingComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Crop productivity is influenced by a number of management and environmental conditions, and variations in crop growth can occur in-season due to, for example, unfavourable meteorological conditions. Consequently information on crop growth must be temporally frequent in order to adequately characterize crop productivity. Leaf Area Index (LAI) is a key indicator of crop productivity and a number of methods have been developed to derive LAI from optical satellite data. Integration of LAI estimates from synthetic aperture radar (SAR) sensors would assist in efforts to monitor crop production through the growing season, particularly during periods of persistent cloud cover. Consequently, Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada has assessed the capability of RADARSAT-2 data to estimate LAI. The results of a sensitivity analysis revealed that several SAR polarimetric variables were strongly correlated with LAI derived from optical sensors for small grain crops. As the growing season progressed, contributions from volume scattering from the crop canopies increased. This led to the sensitivity of the intensity of linear cross-polarization backscatter, entropy and the Freeman-Durden volume scattering component, to LAI. For wheat and oats, correlations above 0.8 were reported. Following this sensitivity analysis, the Water Cloud Model (WCM) was parameterized using LAI, soil moisture and SAR data. A look up table inversion approach to estimate LAI from SAR parameters, using the WCM, was subsequently developed. This inversion approach can be used to derive LAI from sensors like RADARSAT-2 to support the monitoring of crop condition throughout the cropping season.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207