MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2035734375 · doi:10.1080/17538947.2011.608813

SAR polarimetric change detection for flooded vegetation

2011· article· en· W2035734375 on OpenAlexaff
Brian Brisco, Andreas Schmitt, Kevin Murnaghan, Selim Kaya, Achim Roth

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Digital Earth · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
FundersChinese Academy of Sciences
KeywordsRemote sensingChange detectionSynthetic aperture radarVegetation (pathology)Environmental scienceSpeckle patternPolarimetryGeologyComputer scienceScatteringArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Due to spatial and temporal variability an effective monitoring system for water resources must consider the use of remote sensing to provide information. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) is useful due to timely data acquisition and sensitivity to surface water and flooded vegetation. The ability to map flooded vegetation is attributed to the double bounce scattering mechanism, often dominant for this target. Dong Ting Lake in China is an ideal site for evaluating SAR data for this application due to annual flooding caused by mountain snow melt causing extensive changes in flooded vegetation. A curvelet-based approach for change detection in SAR imagery works well as it highlights the change and suppresses the speckle noise. This paper addresses the extension of this change detection technique to polarimetric SAR data for monitoring surface water and flooded vegetation. RADARSAT-2 images of Dong Ting Lake demonstrate this curvelet-based change detection technique applied to wetlands although it is applicable to other land covers and for post disaster impact assessment. These tools are important to Digital Earth for map updating and revision.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.208 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations137
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Digital EarthSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207