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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".