MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140885092 · doi:10.1109/igarss.1997.608967

Determination of propagation parameters from fully polarimetric radar data

2002· article· en· W2140885092 on OpenAlexaff
V. Santalla del Rio, Yahia M. M. Antar

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicOptical Polarization and Ellipsometry
Canadian institutionsRoyal Military College of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCovariance matrixCovariancePolarimetryAttenuationScatteringPolarization (electrochemistry)RadarPhysicsWave propagationAnisotropyMatrix (chemical analysis)Differential phaseMueller calculusBackscatter (email)Computational physicsOpticsMathematicsPhase (matter)AlgorithmComputer scienceStatisticsMaterials scienceChemistryTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The polarization characteristics of the electromagnetics waves, as related to its interaction with targets, is an important aspect in remote sensing applications. This polarization information is usually contained in either the scattering matrix or the covariance matrix depending on the target under consideration. Often, propagation effects are normally not considered in obtaining them. In clear-air conditions this a reasonable assumption, but when rain, or any other type of precipitation, exists in the ray-path, depolarization of the waves may not be negligible anymore. The anisotropy that precipitation media present causes this depolarization and that could greatly affect the scattering or covariance matrix measurements. Consequently, the real target information may be hidden in those measured matrices and it could be necessary to apply different algorithms to correct for depolarization effects prior to target information extraction. Depolarization effects can be determined and accounted for if the characteristic polarizations of the medium and their respective propagation constants are known. It is found that for precipitation media that generally present reflection symmetry these polarizations are linear and orthogonal. Then it is shown that differential attenuation can be obtained from copolar power measurements and differential phase shift from copolar correlation measurements. Considering the statistics of these covariance matrix elements and temporal correlation between successive pulses from the target, statistics of propagation parameters are analyzed.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.369

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOptical Polarization and EllipsometryFrench-language works237,207