Impact of Orthorectification on Simulated Compact Polarimetric RCM Data With Accurate Lidar DSM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Orthorectification using digital terrain models is a key issue for polarimetric complex synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data because resampling the complex data can corrupt the polarimetric phase, mainly in terrain with relief. Orthorectification will be also a sensitive issue with the compact polarimetric data of the future Canadian Radar Constellation Mission (RCM) sensor to be launched in 2018. Two orthorectification methods for the complex SAR data are thus proposed and compared: performing polarimetric processing in the image space before the geometric processing or in the ground space after the geometric processing. RCM compact polarimetric data using the requirements of the very high resolution (VHR) mode were simulated at the Canada Centre for Mapping and Earth Observation from fine-quad Radarsat-2 data acquired with different look angles over a hilly relief study site. Quantitative evaluations between the two methods, using a basis-invariant parameter (the entropy), were thus performed to evaluate the impact of orthorectification on the simulated VHR RCM data. To avoid the propagation of elevation errors into the final error budget, an accurate lidar digital surface model was used in the orthorectification. The results demonstrated that the oversampling and the noise floor that is used to generate the simulated VHR RCM data are the main factors, which corrupted the simulated VHR RCM data during its orthorectification with the ground-space method.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".