MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982632593 · doi:10.1117/12.619215

Measurement of ocean water optical properties and seafloor reflectance with scanning hydrographic operational airborne lidar survey (SHOALS): II. Practical results and comparison with independent data

2005· article· en· W1982632593 on OpenAlexaff
Grady Tuell, Viktor Feygels, Yuri Kopilevich, Alan Weidemann, Alexander Cunningham, Reza Mani, Vladimir I. Podoba, Vinod Ramnath, J. Y. Park, Jen Aitken

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsOptech (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShoalRemote sensingNormalization (sociology)Environmental scienceRadiometryLidarGeologyOpticsPhysicsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Estimation of water column optical properties and seafloor reflectance (532 nm) is demonstrated using recent SHOALS data collected at Fort Lauderdale, Florida (November, 2003). To facilitate this work, the first radiometric calibrations of SHOALS were performed. These calibrations permit a direct normalization of recorded data by converting digitized counts at the output of the SHOALS receivers to input optical power. For estimation of environmental parameters, this normalization is required to compensate for the logarithmic compression of the signals and the finite frequency of the bandpass of the detector/amplifier. After normalization, the SHOALS data are used to estimate the backscattering coefficient, the beam attenuation coefficient, the single-scattering albedo, the VSF asymmetry, and seafloor reflectance by fitting simulated waveforms to actual waveforms measured by the SHOALS APD and PMT receivers. The resulting estimates of these water column optical properties are compared to in-situ measurements acquired at the time of the airborne data collections. Images of green laser bottom reflectance are also presented and compared to reflectance estimated from simultaneously acquired passive spectral data.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.374
Threshold uncertainty score0.638

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations31
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207