MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150514017 · doi:10.3390/rs61010051

Slope Estimation from ICESat/GLAS

2014· article· en· W2150514017 on OpenAlexaff
Craig Mahoney, Natascha Kljun, S. O. Los, L. Chasmer, Jörg Hacker, Christopher Hopkinson, Peter North, J. Rosette, Eva van Gorsel

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersConsortium of International Agricultural Research CentersVetenskapsrådetLunds UniversitetNational Centre for Earth ObservationNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsShuttle Radar Topography MissionDigital elevation modelLidarRemote sensingAltimeterElevation (ballistics)GeologySatelliteMean squared errorRadarFootprintEnvironmental scienceGeodesyGeometryComputer scienceMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a novel technique to infer ground slope angle from waveform LiDAR, known as the independent slope method (ISM). The technique is applied to large footprint waveforms (\(\sim\) mean diameter) from the Ice, Cloud and Land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) Geoscience Laser Altimeter System (GLAS) to produce a slope dataset of near-global coverage at \(0.5^{\circ} \times 0.5^{\circ}\) resolution. ISM slope estimates are compared against high resolution airborne LiDAR slope measurements for nine sites across three continents. ISM slope estimates compare better with the aircraft data (R\(^{2}=0.87\) and RMSE\(=5.16^{\circ}\)) than the Shuttle Radar Topography Mission Digital Elevation Model (SRTM DEM) inferred slopes (R\(^{2}=0.71\) and RMSE\(=8.69^{\circ}\)) ISM slope estimates are concurrent with GLAS waveforms and can be used to correct biophysical parameters, such as tree height and biomass. They can also be fused with other DEMs, such as SRTM, to improve slope estimates.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0000.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207