MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972742702 · doi:10.1109/ccece.2014.6901104

Understanding the significance of radiometric calibration for synthetic aperture radar imagery

2014· article· en· W1972742702 on OpenAlexafffund
Khalid El-Darymli, Peter McGuire, Eric W. Gill, Desmond Power, Cecilia Moloney

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources EngineeringMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanadian Space AgencyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAtlantic Canada Opportunities AgencyDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarCalibrationComputer scienceRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceBackscatter (email)MathematicsGeologyStatisticsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In applications such as target recognition, quantitative use of the information present in synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery is pivotal for detecting and classifying the scattering centers of the target(s). This paper presents an investigation of the various forms for radiometric calibration in SAR imagery. For the cases of point and extended targets, respectively, the radar cross section (σ) and the backscatter coefficient (σ <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">o</sub> ) are studied. Other forms of the backscatter coefficient, including the radar brightness (β <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">o</sub> ) and (γ <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">o</sub> ) are also examined, and their relevance to σ <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">o</sub> is presented. A real-world SAR chip from a single-channel Radarsat-2 image for groundtruthed vehicle targets is used to demonstrate the applicability of the radiometric calibrations. It is concluded that the β <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">o</sub> calibration gives the most accurate result, in contrast to σ <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">o</sub> and γ <sub xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">o</sub> because it is not dependent on the sea-level geoid model typically used to approximate the local incidence angles.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.832
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations42
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207