MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2285251433 · doi:10.1002/2015jc011044

Rain effects on the hurricane observations over the ocean by C‐band Synthetic Aperture Radar

2015· article· en· W2285251433 on OpenAlexaff
Guosheng Zhang, Xiaofeng Li, William Perrie, Biao Zhang, Lei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Oceans · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNational Program on Global Change and Air-Sea InteractionNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaEuropean Space AgencyNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAtmosphere (unit)Synthetic aperture radarEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingAttenuationRadarPolarization (electrochemistry)ScatteringWind speedBackscatter (email)Radiative transferMicrowaveWind waveMeteorologyGeologyAtmospheric sciencesOpticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A composite radar scattering model composed of the atmosphere radiative transfer model, and the ocean surface Bragg wave theory is developed to analyze the impact of hurricane rain on the normalized radar‐backscatter cross section (NRCS) measured in the VV and cross‐polarized C‐band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) channels. The model results are validated against SAR and SFMR measured wind speeds and rain rates for two hurricane cases. The contribution of rain to the NRCS is backscatter from two parts: the atmosphere column and the ocean surface. In the atmosphere, microwave attenuation and the rain‐induced volume backscattering are simulated by the model. We find that the impact of raindrops in the atmosphere is almost negligible for the VV polarization, but important for the cross polarization. On the ocean surface, comparisons between our model and other existing models without rain lead to the conclusion that the VV polarization NRCS can be simulated reasonably well without considering the non‐Bragg scattering mechanisms. Similar to the wave breaking mechanism, the microwave diffraction on the craters, crowns, and stalks, produced by rain drops, is also negligible for VV polarization. However, the non‐Bragg scattering is important for the cross‐polarized NRCS simulations. Finally, we performed simulations to understand the VV‐polarized NRCS behavior under different wind speeds at various rain rates.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.444
Threshold uncertainty score0.534

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations63
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research OceansSame topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207