MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Extraction of Peak Feature Based on Synthetic Sinc Model in SAR images

2015· article· en· W2292832791 on OpenAlexaff
Yingying Kong, Henry Leung, Shun Yan, Shiyu Xing

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Jiangsu ProvinceGovernment of Jiangsu Province
KeywordsSinc functionSynthetic aperture radarArtificial intelligenceSpeckle patternPattern recognition (psychology)Feature (linguistics)Speckle noiseComputer scienceNoise (video)AmplitudeImage (mathematics)Feature extractionAlgorithmComputer visionPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Peak is an important feature in Synthetic Aperture Radar(SAR), which represents essence of scattering centre. There are two general approaches in the literature to extract peak. One way is to extract peak after speckle suppression filtering. Using this method, the extracted feature is in accurate, and the algorithm is more complicated. Another is that detecting the amplitude of the peak directly. In order to have a fast and accurate peak extraction, we proposed using the Sinc peak model algorithm in this paper. It directly extracts peak features from the original SAR image without any noise suppression filtering, which is instead of Gauss mask function. The estimation parameters of peaks use QE theorists. Finally, we can get accuracy three parameters to describe peak features. Analytic fluctuation of parameters is compared with Gauss model peaks using truth SAR images. Experimental demonstrate that the new algorithm is more effective than others for extracting peak features in SAR images.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.255
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciencesSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207