MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074270251 · doi:10.1117/12.2015624

A global review of optronic synthetic aperture radar/ladar processing

2013· review· en· W2074270251 on OpenAlexaff
Linda Marchese, Michel Doucet, Pascal Bourqui, Bernd Harnisch, Martin Süess, Mathieu Legros, Nochola Desnoyers, Simon Turbide, Sandra Turgeon, Luc Mercier, Maxime Savard, Anne Martel, François Châteauneuf, Alain Bergeron

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced SAR Imaging Techniques
Canadian institutionsInstitut National d'Optique
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarRemote sensingComputer scienceRadar imagingSide looking airborne radarInverse synthetic aperture radarLidarRadarEarly-warning radarSpace-based radarGeologyBistatic radarTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synthetic aperture (SA) techniques are currently employed in a variety of imaging modalities, such as radar (SAR) and ladar (SAL). The advantage of fine resolution provided by these systems far outweighs the disadvantage of having large amounts of raw data to process to obtain the final image. Digital processors have been the mainstay for synthetic aperture processing since the 1980’s; however, the original method was optical that is, it employed lenses and other optical elements. This paper provides a global review of a compact light weight optronic processor that combines optical and digital techniques for ultra-fast generation of synthetic aperture images. The overall design of the optronic processor is detailed, including the optical design and data control and handling. As well, its real-time capabilities are demonstrated. Example ENVISAT/ASAR images generated optronically are also presented and compared with ENVISAT Level 1 products. As well, the extended capabilities of optronic processing, including wavefront correction and interferometry are discussed. Finally, a tabletop synthetic aperture ladar system is introduced and SAL images generated using the exact optronic processor designed for SAR image generation are presented.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.006

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIESame topicAdvanced SAR Imaging TechniquesFrench-language works237,207