MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2186412753 · doi:10.5589/m12-041

Subpixel image matching based on Fourier phase correlation for Radarsat-2 stereo-radargrammetry

2014· article· en· W2186412753 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Igor Zakharov, Thierry Toutin

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Image Processing and Photogrammetry
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsSubpixel renderingArtificial intelligencePhase correlationComputer visionMatching (statistics)Synthetic aperture radarComputer scienceAliasingCross-correlationPixelPattern recognition (psychology)Fourier transformRemote sensingMathematicsGeographyFourier analysisStatisticsUndersampling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Image matching is the major step in the radargrammetric process to measure elevation parallax. To extract parallax from stereo synthetic aperture radar images the subpixel image matching method based on Fourier phase correlation was implemented with an algorithm using the hierarchical multiresolution approach and applied to Fine Quad mode Radarsat-2 data. The experimental results with simulated images show that a decrease in intersection angle leads to an increase in matching accuracy of up to 0.06 of a pixel. To validate the matching results a digital surface model was extracted from the real stereo pair and compared with accurate lidar data. The statistics show that there are good improvements (in the order of 10%–20%) in the accuracy over results extracted using a traditional image matching technique based on the normalized cross-correlation. The analysis of the mutual dependence of matching accuracy and stereo pair configurations shows that the application of subpixel matching allows us to make the ra...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.226 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicSatellite Image Processing and PhotogrammetryFrench-language works237,207