Interferometric swath processing of Cryosat data for glacial ice topography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. We have derived digital elevation models (DEMs) over the western part of the Devon Ice Cap in Nunavut, Canada, using "swath processing" of interferometric data collected by Cryosat between February 2011 and January 2012. With the standard ESA (European Space Agency) SARIn (synthetic aperture radar interferometry) level 2 (L2) data product, the interferometric mode is used to map the cross-track position and elevation of the "point-of-closest-approach" (POCA) in sloping glacial terrain. However, in this work we explore the extent to which the phase of the returns in the intermediate L1b product can also be used to map the heights of time-delayed footprints beyond the POCA. We show that there is a range of average cross-track slopes (~ 0.5 to ~ 2°) for which the returns will be dominated by those beneath the satellite in the main beam of the antenna so that the resulting interferometric phase allows mapping of heights in the delayed range window beyond the POCA. In this way a swath of elevation data is mapped, allowing the creation of DEMs from a sequence of L1b SARIn Cryosat data takes. Comparison of the Devon results with airborne scanning laser data showed a mean difference of order 1 m with a standard deviation of about 1 m. The limitations of swath processing, which generates almost 2 orders of magnitude more data than traditional radar altimetry, are explored through simulation, and the strengths and weaknesses of the technique are discussed.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".