MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dual-curve-fitting-based wind parameter extraction from shipborne nautical X-band radar data

2014· article· en· W1990325620 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Liu, Weimin Huang, Eric W. Gill, Dennis Peters

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWind speedAnemometerRemote sensingRadarWind directionCurve fittingRadar imagingComputer scienceGeologyMeteorologyGeographyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, techniques for retrieving wind direction and speed from shipborne X-band nautical radar images are presented. First, by analyzing the radar backscatter intensity histogram and zero-pixel percentage, each individual image is designed to go through a data quality control process. With this processing, the rain cases and all-black images can be recognized. Then, a harmonic function that is least-squares fitted to the radar backscatter intensity as a function of antenna look direction is applied to determine the wind direction. Furthermore, for wind speed retrieval, an empirical third-order polynomial model is derived using the average radar backscatter intensity and the reference wind speed. To improve the accuracy of wind retrieval, a modified technique, which involves a dual-curve-fitting approach, is implemented. For the data presented in this paper, it was found that the second stage of the curve-fitting performed optimally when the data at angles of 60° to the left and right of the first-guess upwind direction were used. Also, only the data for the dual-curve-fitting were used to calculate the average intensity of the radar images for wind speed estimation. The modified method is applied to the radar data and the results are compared with the reference data measured by a ship-based anemometer. It is shown that the dual-curve-fitting algorithm produces improvements in the mean differences between the radar and the anemometer results for wind direction and speed of about 7° and 0.4 m/s, respectively, under low sea state.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207