MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2408718570 · doi:10.1109/jstars.2016.2560342

Dual-Polarimetric C- and X-Band SAR Data for Coastline Extraction

2016· article· en· W2408718570 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ferdinando Nunziata, Andrea Buono, Maurizio Migliaccio, Guido Benassai

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Space AgencyUniversitat de BarcelonaEuropean Space AgencyNova Southeastern University
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarRemote sensingGround truthPolarimetryComputer scienceRadar imagingPixelInverse synthetic aperture radarL bandC bandSide looking airborne radarRadarGeologyArtificial intelligenceBistatic radarScatteringPhysicsTelecommunicationsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study proposes a new metric to process dual-polarimetric coherent and incoherent synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data for coastline extraction purposes. The metric, based on the correlation between co- and cross-polarized channels, allows discriminating land from sea in an unsupervised way. Then, simple image processing is adopted to extract continuous coastline from the binary image. Experiments, undertaken on multipolarization C- (RadarSAT-2 and Sentinel-1) and X-band (Cosmo-SkyMed) SAR data collected in South of Italy together with Global Positioning System ground truth, confirm the soundness of the method which is shown to be both effective (a whole SAR scene is processed in seconds) and accurate (the mean error is less than $5$ and $7$ pixels for RadarSAT-2 and CosmoSkyMed, respectively).

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
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

Citations76
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207