MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105278802 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2003.1293733

SAR measurements of ocean wind and wave fields in hurricanes

2004· article· en· W2105278802 on OpenAlexaff
Jochen Horstmann, P.W. Vachon, Susanne Lehner, Danielle Hoja

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarWind wave modelScatterometerWind waveMeteorologyRemote sensingSignificant wave heightGeologyWave radarWind speedWave heightSurface waveRadarEyeMode (computer interface)Space-based radarNumerical weather predictionTropical cycloneClimatologyRadar imagingComputer scienceGeographyRadar engineering detailsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spaceborne synthetic aperture radar (SAR) is still the only instrument providing directional information on surface wind and ocean waves on a global and continuous basis. From RADARSAT-1, many SAR images have been collected over the past years, which cover several hurricanes and allow investigation of the wind and wave fields under these extreme situations. A time-frame of 27 days of ERS-2 SAR wave mode data was processed, which covers several tropical cyclones in the Atlantic Ocean, of which Hurricane Edouard has been investigated in detail together with additional data available from scatterometers, buoys and weather centers. The wind fields and wave parameters are extracted from SAR imagery and compared to results of the numerical model output provided by the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecast (ECMWF) and co-located ERS-2 scatterometer measurements. For each wave system, spectral parameters such as wavelength, wave propagation direction and wave age are calculated and compared to the numerical model output provided by ECMWF.

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 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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207