MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ocean Surveillance with Polarimetric SAR

2001· article· en· W2026930882 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
M.L. Yeremy, James W. Campbell, K.E. Mattar, Terry Potter

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Une mission clé du ministère de la Défense nationale consiste à assurer la surveillance des eaux canadiennes. Pendant très longtemps, cette tâche a été accomplie grâce à un agencement de vols de patrouille du CP-140 et de rapports de navires de guerre. Récemment, on a prospecté l'utilisation de satellites commerciaux tels que RADARSAT-1 pour la détection de navires. Les futurs satellites commerciaux tels que ENVISAT et RADARSAT-2 auront des modes à polarisation double et à polarisation quadruple. L'exploitation polarimétrique des données SAR permet éventuellement d'obtenir de l'information sur la structure d'une cible. On s'attend à ce que cette information améliore les capacités de détection d'images SAR de navires. Le présent document fait rapport des résultats de plusieurs techniques polarimétriques appliquées à la détection de navires. On a également effectué une étude approfondie de la détectabilité relative des navires dans le cas des canaux à polarisation orthogonale et des canaux copolaires. Les résultats obtenus des méthodes entièrement polarimétriques, comparés à ceux des canaux simples indiquent une meilleure capacité de détection de navires. Comme les résultats présentés ici le montrent, une méthode fournit des renseignements structuraux qui conviennent à la classification. Les cas où des signaux saturés affaiblissent la détection polarimétrique sont analysés.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations92
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207