MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2031924583 · doi:10.1117/12.568737

Analysis of air-soil temperature differences at five locations for applications in passive standoff chemical detection

2004· article· en· W2031924583 on OpenAlexafffund
Caroline S. Turcotte, Jean‐Marc Thériault

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
FundersDefence Research and Development Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingContrast (vision)Absolute zeroRadiative transferIndoor airAir temperatureAtmospheric sciencesMeteorologyStatisticsMathematicsOpticsPhysicsGeologyEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For a passive spectral sensor, the temperature difference (DT) that exists between a chemical cloud and the background scene is of prime importance because it is linked to the radiative contrast of the target. The larger DT, the better the radiative contrast and the more accurate is the detection and identification, of the cloud. This paper establishes statistics on realistic air-soil DT to be used to estimate the detection performance of passive spectral sensors in a variety of scenarios and environments. To this end, an analysis of the air-soil DT is presented for five locations around the world. The results of the analysis indicate that the statistics of the air-soil absolute DT are similar from one location to another. The average statistics over the five locations show a mean absolute air-soil DT of 3.5 °C and a median of 2.8 °C. An absolute air-soil DT of less than one degree Celsius occurs less than 14% of the time on the average. This suggests that, on average, air-soil temperature contrasts should yield good detection probabilities 86% of the time.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE→Same topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols→French-language works237,207→