MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168949884 · doi:10.1175/bams-d-11-00001.1

Cross-Polarized Synthetic Aperture Radar: A New Potential Measurement Technique for Hurricanes

2011· article· en· W2168949884 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of the American Meteorological Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarRemote sensingBuoyWind speedRadarEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyWind directionPolarization (electrochemistry)Radar cross-sectionGeologyMicrowave radiometerRadiometerPhysicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an empirical C-band Cross-Polarization Ocean (C-2PO) model for wind retrievals from synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data collected by the RADARSAT-2 satellite. The C-2PO model relates normalized radar cross section (NRCS) in cross polarization to wind speed at 10-m height. This wind retrieval model has the characteristic that it is independent of wind direction and radar incidence angle but is quite linear with respect to wind speed. To evaluate the accuracy of the proposed model, winds with a resolution on the scale of 1 km were retrieved from a dual-polarization SAR image of Hurricane Earl on 2 September 2010, using the C-2PO model and compared with CMOD5.N, the newest available C-band geophysical model function (GMF), and validated with collocated airborne stepped-frequency microwave radiometer measurements and National Data Buoy Center data. Results suggest that for winds up to 38 m s−1, C-2PO has a bias of −0.89 m s−1 and a root-meansquare error of 3.23 m s−1 compared to CMOD5.N, which has a bias of −4.14 m s−1 and an rms difference of 6.24 m s−1. Similar results are obtained from Hurricane Ike, comparing wind retrievals from C-2PO and CMOD5.N with H*Wind data. The advantage of C-2PO over CMOD5.N and other GMFs is that it does not need any external wind direction and radar incidence angle inputs. Moreover, in the presently available quad-polarization dataset, C-2PO has the feature that the cross-polarized NRCS linearly increases even for wind speeds up to 26 m s−1 and reproduces the hurricane eye structure well, thereby providing a potential technique for hurricane observations from space.

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.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.628
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.195 · 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