MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134795927 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2008.4779319

Dual Polarization Detection of Ships and Icebergs - Recent Results with ENVISAT ASAR and Data Simulations of RADARSAT-2

2008· article· en· W2134795927 on OpenAlexaff
Carl Howell, Desmond Power, M. Lynch, Kelley Dodge, P. Bobby, C. Randell, P.W. Vachon, Gordon Staples

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development CanadaCentre For Cold Ocean Resources Engineering
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarRemote sensingGeologyPolarimetryIcebergInverse synthetic aperture radarSpace-based radarSatelliteRadar imagingComputer scienceRadarBistatic radarEngineeringSea iceScatteringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The RADARSAT-2 satellite is an advanced C-band synthetic aperture radar (SAR) with a variety of new modes including options for polarization combinations, resolution, and swath width. This paper examines the potential of multi polarization data for detecting and discriminating ship and iceberg targets Data used in this study consist of well validated airborne Convair-580 SAR and spaceborne ASAR HH/HV and HH/VV. In total, the data set used for evaluating detection and discrimination consists of 901 validated iceberg and ship targets. Optimizing target detection is accomplished using receiver operator curves (ROC) as proposed by [6] and discrimination is conducted using a quadratic discriminant (QD) with feature selection based on sequential forward selection (SFS). In general it was found that detection and discrimination improve with more polarimetric information; however, HH/HV and VV/VH only had nominally less discrimination performance than the quad polarization modes evaluated.

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)0.002
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations15
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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