MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124416224 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2004.1368940

Evaluation of an operational SAR wind field retrieval algorithm for ENVISAT ASAR

2004· article· en· W2124416224 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jochen Horstmann, Wolfgang Koch

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarScatterometerRemote sensingWind speedGeologySatelliteWind directionRadarMeteorologyGeodesyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The operational algorithm WiSAR is introduced, which enables to extract high-resolution ocean surface wind fields from satellite borne synthetic aperture radars (SARs) on a fully operational basis. WiSAR can be applied to SAR data acquired in C-band at either vertical (VV) or horizontal (HH) polarization in transmit and receive from the European satellites ERS-1/2 and ENVISAT as well as the Canadian satellite RADARSAT-1. SAR wind field retrieval is a two step process. In the first step wind directions are extracted from wind induced streaks that are visible in the SAR images at scales above 200 m and that are assumed to be approximately in line with the mean surface wind direction. The orientations of these streaks are derived by a method based on investigation of local gradients of the SAR intensity image. The SAR retrieved wind directions are used in the second step, where wind speeds are derived from the normalized radar cross sections of the SAR data under consideration of the wind direction and local SAR imaging geometry. Therefore, the empirical model CMOD4, is used, which was developed for the C-band VV polarized scatterometer aboard ERS-1/2. CMOD4 has been extended to HH polarization considering the polarization ratio and its dependency on incidence angle. To show WiSARs applicability it is applied to a set of 32 ENVISAT ASAR data from the North Sea. The resulting wind fields are compared to the results of the operational numerical model of the German Weather Service.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.899

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.268
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207