MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005096075 · doi:10.1049/iet-rsn.2013.0281

Iterative least‐squares‐based wave measurement using X‐band nautical radar

2014· article· en· W2005096075 on OpenAlexafffund
Weimin Huang, Eric W. Gill, Jiaqi An

Bibliographic record

VenueIET Radar Sonar & Navigation · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaResearch and Development Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador
KeywordsRemote sensingRadarLeast-squares function approximationGeologyAcousticsComputer scienceGeodesyOpticsPhysicsMathematicsTelecommunicationsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, an existing iterative least‐squares (LS) method for determining ocean surface currents from X‐band nautical radar images is modified for extracting ocean wave information from the same data. Within each iterative step, the image spectra samples are classified as containing contributions from fundamental, first‐order and higher harmonic waves or noise. Based on the classification result, a new scheme is proposed to increase the robustness of current estimation. This involves automatically adjusting the first threshold that is used for obtaining an initial guess of the current velocity in the iterative LS method. The proposed wave algorithm directly uses the classified fundamental and first‐order harmonic wave components for wave spectra and parameter retrieval. Unlike previous wave analysis techniques in which a bandpass filter is required to eliminate the non‐wave contributions after the current velocity is obtained, the proposed algorithm simplifies the wave retrieval without such a bandpass filter. Algorithm verification is first conducted by using simulated radar images. Subsequently, the method is applied to field radar data and the results are compared with wave‐buoy measurements. Wave parameters from both types of data show that the modified wave algorithm produces results that are close to those achieved using traditional algorithms.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
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

Citations45
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIET Radar Sonar & NavigationSame topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207