MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2003079203 · doi:10.1080/01431160152027665

Multitemporal monitoring of soil moisture with RADARSAT SAR during the 1997 Southern Great Plains hydrology experiment

2001· article· en· W2003079203 on OpenAlexfundno aff
A. J. Wickel, Thomas J. Jackson, Eric F. Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Space AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarWater contentEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingCorrelation coefficientMoistureHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceGeologyMeteorologyGeographyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multitemporal RADARSAT Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) imagery was evaluated for monitoring soil moisture during the Southern Great Plains 1997 Hydrology Experiment (SGP97). Over the 1-month experiment a total of 10 RADARSAT (C-band; 5.3GHz; HH polarized) acquisitions were obtained. After co-registration of the images, the dependence of the backscattering coefficient (σ) on incidence angle (θ) was evaluated. An angular correction scheme was applied to the data and the correlation of a values with volumetric soil moisture measurements was determined. A high positive correlation between the two was observed for wheat stubble fields, whereas no correlation could be observed for pasture fields. A change detection approach yielded a correlation of soil moisture changes to σ changes for wheat stubble fields, indicating the potential of this method for soil moisture monitoring.

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)0.000
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations53
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Remote SensingSame topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207