MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061809320 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2013.2248739

Despeckling of Synthetic Aperture Radar Images Using Monte Carlo Texture Likelihood Sampling

2013· article· en· W2061809320 on OpenAlex
Jeffrey Glaister, Alexander Wong, David A. Clausi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicImage and Signal Denoising Methods
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarArtificial intelligenceSpeckle noiseComputer scienceSpeckle patternMonte Carlo methodNoise (video)Pattern recognition (psychology)Computer visionSampling (signal processing)Similarity (geometry)Signal-to-noise ratio (imaging)Radar imagingTexture (cosmology)Image textureAlgorithmRadarImage (mathematics)MathematicsImage processingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Speckle noise is found in synthetic aperture radar (SAR) images and can affect visualization and analysis. A novel stochastic texture-based algorithm is proposed to suppress speckle noise while preserving the underlying structural and texture detail. Based on a sorted local texture model and a Fisher-Tippett logarithmic-space speckle distribution model, a Monte Carlo texture likelihood sampling strategy is proposed to estimate the true signal. The algorithm is compared to six other classic and state-of-the-art despeckling techniques. The comparison is performed both on synthetic noisy images added and on actual SAR images. Using peak signal-to-noise ratio, contrast-to-noise ratio, and structural similarity index as image quality metrics, the proposed algorithm shows strong despeckling performance when compared to existing despeckling algorithms.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score0.794

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.242 · 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