MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2200827065 · doi:10.5589/m11-031

Roll-invariant target decomposition in bistatic polarimetric SAR imagery

2011· article· en· W2200827065 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lionel Bombrun

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsBistatic radarPolarimetryScatteringWishart distributionSynthetic aperture radarPolarization (electrochemistry)PhysicsInvariant (physics)Scattering amplitudeHelicityRadar imagingRemote sensingComputer scienceRadarOpticsArtificial intelligenceGeographyQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The polarimetric information has been widely used to interpret the Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) scene. Hence, many coherent and incoherent target decompositions have been recently introduced to extract polarimetric parameters with a physical meaning. Nevertheless, for most of them, the reciprocity assumption is assumed. For a bistatic Polarimetric SAR (PolSAR) sensor, the cross-polarization terms of the scattering matrix are not equal in general. This paper presents a generalization of the Target Scattering Vector Model (TSVM) to the bistatic case. Five roll-invariant parameters are necessary for an unambiguous description of the target scattering mechanism: α s, φ α s , τ1, τ2, and µ. The scattering type magnitude α s and phase φ α s contain information on the scattering type mechanism. The target helicity τ1 is a measure of the target symmetry. The target helicity τ2 contains information on the asymmetrical part of the scattering matrix, and µ is the maximum amplitude return.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.993
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations6
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207