MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2042152728 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2008.4780059

Evaluating ALOS-PALSAR for Ice Monitoring - What Can L-band do for the North American Ice Service?

2008· article· en· W2042152728 on OpenAlexaffabout
Matt Arkett, Dean Flett, Roger De Abreu, P. Clemente‐Colón, Brian Melchior

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Hydrographic Service
FundersJapan Aerospace Exploration Agency
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarSatelliteRemote sensingC bandMeteorologyRadarEnvironmental scienceInterferometric synthetic aperture radarSpace-based radarGeographyComputer scienceRadar imagingEngineeringTelecommunicationsRadar engineering details

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Ice Service (CIS), the U. S. National Ice Center (NIC), and the International Ice Patrol (IIP), partners in the North American Ice Service (NAIS), have individually and jointly used airborne and spaceborne synthetic aperture radar data extensively for almost three decades in their daily ice monitoring operations. SAR's unique ability to penetrate clouds and weather make these data invaluable to the NAIS' efficient environmental stewardship and safe operation in Canadian and U. S. waters. Since 1992, solely C-Band satellite radar has been in use as operational SAR missions such as ERS 1 & 2, RADARSAT-1, and Envisat ASAR have selected it as the band of choice. With the launch of RADARSAT-2 on December 2007 and approved plans for Sentinel-1, the NAIS intends to continue utilizing C-Band data in its daily operations. However, it is important to understand the unique and complementary capabilities of other SAR bands. The January 2006 launch of the JAXA ALOS satellite and present availability of L-band SAR data from its PALSAR instrument provides a unique opportunity to assess L-band data for application to ice monitoring. ALOS/PALSAR availability also provides the potential for examining the synergies between L-Band data and C-Band data available from the current and planned C-Band missions. The existing literature suggests that the use of different frequencies could be advantageous in certain ice conditions, which is of interest to the NAIS because of the vastness of the geographical area monitored annually and the associated variations in ice regimes and conditions.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.941
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations20
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics→French-language works237,207→