3-D Radargrammetric Modeling of RADARSAT-2 Ultrafine Mode: Preliminary Results of the Geometric Calibration
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The geometry and the accuracy of the 3-D cartographic localization of RADARSAT-2 images are being evaluated as part of the Canadian Space Agency's Science and Operational Applications Research program. In a first step, the Toutin's 3-D physical model, previously developed for RADARSAT-1, was adapted to RADARSAT-2 sensor and applied to two ultrafine mode images (U2 and U25) acquired over an area in Beauport, Quebec. Both the 3-D modeling computed with only 12 ground control points and its geometric localization were evaluated with different check data: 1) independent check points; 2) the two quasi-epipolar images; 3) the two orthoimages; and 4) 1-m accurate orthophotos. All four results and validations are in agreement and confirm that the 3-D geometric localization and restitution accuracy are 1 m in planimetry and 2 m in elevation. The checked data error being included in these evaluations and the relative error computed from the quasi-epipolar comparison provided a high level of confidence that the precision of Toutin's 3-D radargrammetric model is better than 0.25 m.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it