MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2276677788 · doi:10.14288/1.0096705

Radiometric correction of satellite imagery for topographic and atmospheric effects

2010· article· en· W2276677788 on OpenAlexaff
Malcolm Haig Gray

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSatellite Image Processing and Photogrammetry
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadiometric datingRemote sensingSatelliteSatellite imageryAtmospheric correctionEnvironmental scienceRadiometryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The radiometry of satellite imagery is influenced by ground cover, local topography, and atmosphere. In order to increase the accuracy of ground cover identification from satellite imagery, effects due to topography and atmosphere must be removed. These effects can be estimated by modeling the image-formation process. For this thesis an image-formation model is developed and tested on Landsat MSS data over a mountainous region. Solar illumination angle, atmosphere depth, and sky illumination are calculated with the help of a digital elevation model. A digital forest cover map is used to select a target forest type for which model parameters are estimated using regression analysis. Results of this analysis indicate that solar illumination angle has the largest effect on target pixel irradiance followed by atmosphere depth. Sky illumination as calculated, was significantly correlated with target pixel irradiance but in a negative sense. This correlation suggests that inter reflection (also called mutual illumination) from adjacent terrain may be a small but significant source of illumination. The estimated model parameters are used to correct the imagery for topographic and atmospheric effects. Visual assessment of the corrected imagery indicates that many but not all of the topographic effects have been reduced. Comparisons between computer classified imagery and the forest cover map show an improvement in correctly classified pixels from 54% for the original image to 72% for the corrected image.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.160
Teacher spread0.157 · 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

Citations6
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicSatellite Image Processing and PhotogrammetryFrench-language works237,207