MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2132003050 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2011.6049553

SAR tomography development for Radarsat-2

2011· article· en· W2132003050 on OpenAlexafffund
Valentin Poncoș, Michael Collins

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsTomographyRemote sensingComputer sciencePixelComputer visionSoarInterferometryTomographic reconstructionSynthetic aperture radarRange (aeronautics)Dimension (graph theory)Artificial intelligenceIterative reconstructionGeologyPhysicsAerospace engineeringOpticsEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Presently, a standard SAR image is obtained using two dimensional information acquired in a single pass monostatic acquisition. The third dimension of the image is folded in the 2D space based on the range information. With the availability of large datasets acquired with high resolution and from slightly different positions it was shown that amplitude and phase variation of persistent targets can be mapped to the relative target position within the pixel. Persistent Scatterers Interferometry solved the mapping problem for singe targets and Tomography is trying to solve it for multiple targets per pixel. Current challenges for the tomographic techniques are the insufficient and irregular baselines spread supplied by SAR missions not designed with this particular application in mind. Based on SAR sensor and orbits parameters, each mission has different tomographic capabilities. This SOAR-DLR project will explore the tomographic capabilities of Radarsat-2 in comparison and eventually in synergy with TerraSAR-X.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207