POLARIMETRIC SAR MODEL FOR SOIL MOISTURE ESTIMATION OVER VINEYARDS AT C-BAND
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract—In this paper we propose a two-component polarimetric model for soil moisture estimation on vineyards suited for C-band radar data. According to a polarimetric analysis carried out here, this scenario is made up of one dominant direct return from the soil and a multiple scattering component accounting for disturbing and non-modeled signal fluctuations from soil and short vegetation. We propose a combined X-Bragg/Fresnel approach to characterize the polarized direct response from soil. A validation of this polarimetric model has been performed in terms of its consistency with respect to the available data both from RADARSAT-2 and from indoor measurements. High inversion rates are reported for different phenological stages of vines, and the model gives a consistent interpretation of the data as long as the volume component power remains about or below 50 % of the surface contribution power. However, the scarcity of soil moisture measurements in this study prevents the validation of the algorithm in terms of the accuracy of soil moisture retrieval and an extensive campaign is required to fully demonstrate the validity of the model. Different sources of mismatches between the model and the data have been also discussed and analyzed. 1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".