MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171699268 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2010.2076286

Interferometric SAR Phase Filtering in the Wavelet Domain Using Simultaneous Detection and Estimation

2010· article· en· W2171699268 on OpenAlexaff
Yong Bian, Bryan Mercer

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersJapan Aerospace Exploration Agency
KeywordsWaveletComputer scienceEstimatorWavelet packet decompositionWavelet transformSynthetic aperture radarNoise (video)CurveletArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmPattern recognition (psychology)MathematicsStatisticsImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, two interferometric SAR (InSAR) phase-filtering methods are proposed. These methods are performed in the wavelet domain and employ the simultaneous detection and estimation technique. In the wavelet domain, closed-form estimator and detector equations are derived, based upon a quadratic cost function, to minimize the combined risk of detection and estimation and, thus, the least square errors. Both methods occur within the wavelet domain; however, the first method employs the wavelet packet, while the second method is performed in the undecimated wavelet domain. A major characteristic of InSAR phase data is that the noise level is spatially variable, and the proposed methods have a particularly good comparative performance in these situations. Tests are performed using simulated phase data and show that the proposed methods have lower root-mean-square error and less noisy fringes in the filtering results than those of three existing “state-of-the-art” wavelet-domain phase-filtering methods. Tests using real InSAR data also demonstrate the superiority of the proposed methods in terms of visual and quantitative evaluation.

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 score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations36
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207