MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154867667 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2008.2008908

Estimation of Surface Roughness Parameter in Intertidal Mudflat Using Airborne Polarimetric SAR Data

2009· article· en· W2154867667 on OpenAlexaff
Sang-Eun Park, Wooil M. Moon, Duk‐jin Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersKorea Aerospace Research InstituteNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsIntertidal zoneSynthetic aperture radarPolarimetryRemote sensingSurface roughnessInversion (geology)GeologySurface finishScatteringOceanographyGeomorphologyPhysicsOpticsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coastal zones of the Korean peninsula are well known for their large tide ranges and vast expanse of intertidal flats. In this paper, methods of extracting the roughness of the scattering surface of intertidal mudflats from polarimetric synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data have been investigated. The L-band NASA/Jet Propulsion Laboratories airborne SAR data, which were acquired in the intertidal zone during PACRIM-II Korea campaign, were used to estimate the roughness of intertidal mudflats. Surface roughness can be utilized as a useful parameter to monitor the fishery activities in intertidal flats as well as the changes in textural characteristics of surface sediments. In order to retrieve roughness parameters, such as the rms height and the correlation length, of intertidal mudflats, three types of roughness inversion algorithms, based on the Integral Equation Method (IEM), semiempirical, and extended-Bragg models, have been investigated and developed. The inversion algorithms based on the IEM and semiempirical models can be applied to the dual-polarized SAR, while the extended-Bragg model-based inversion approach is also applicable to the fully polarimetric SAR observations. Results indicate the fully polarimetric approach is more pertinent to monitor geophysical parameters from space than the dual polarimetric approach, even if it is possible to reduce the number of unknown surface variables in the specific case of inversion problems.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations56
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207