High Resolution Wind Fields Retrieved From Spaceborne Synthetic Aperture Radar Images in Comparison to Numerical Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper introduces a recently developed algorithm to retrieve high-resolution wind fields over the ocean surface from spaceborne synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data. The algorithm consists of two parts, the first for determining wind direction and the second for wind speed retrieval. Wind directions are extracted from wind induced streaks e.g. from boundary layer rolls, Langmuir cells, or wind shadowing, which are approximately in line with the mean wind direction. Wind speed is derived from the normalized radar cross section (NRCS) and image geometry of the SAR image, together with the local retrieved wind direction. The application of SAR-wind retrieval in coastal regions is demonstrated using data acquired aboard the European satellites ERS-1 and ERS-2 and the Canadian satellite RADARSAT-1. These data allow to measure wind fields of an area of up to 500 km × 500 km with a resolution of up to 200 m. To improve and validate the set-up of numerical high-resolution models in coastal regions SAR-retrieved wind fields offer an unique opportunity. This is shown by comparisons of wind fields measured by SAR to results of the numerical model REMO, HIRLAM and GESIMA.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".