MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2579746766 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2016.2631126

Surface Soil Moisture Retrieval Using the L-Band Synthetic Aperture Radar Onboard the Soil Moisture Active–Passive Satellite and Evaluation at Core Validation Sites

2017· article· en· W2579746766 on OpenAlexaff
Seung-Bum Kim, J.J. van Zyl, Joel T. Johnson, Mahta Moghaddam, Leung Tsang, Andreas Colliander, R. S. Dunbar, Thomas J. Jackson, Sermsak Jaruwatanadilok, Richard West, Aaron Berg, Todd G. Caldwell, Michael H. Cosh, David C. Goodrich, Stanley Livingston, Ernesto López-Baeza, Tracy Rowlandson, M. Thibeault, Jeffrey P. Walker, Dara Entekhabi, E. G. Njoku, Peggy O’Neill, Simon Yueh

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersAustralian Research CouncilJet Propulsion Laboratory
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarWater contentVegetation (pathology)TerrainRadarSatelliteSurface roughnessSoil scienceGeologyGeographyMaterials scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper evaluates the retrieval of soil moisture in the top 5-cm layer at 3-km spatial resolution using L-band dual-copolarized Soil Moisture Active-Passive (SMAP) synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data that mapped the globe every three days from mid-April to early July, 2015. Surface soil moisture retrievals using radar observations have been challenging in the past due to complicating factors of surface roughness and vegetation scattering. Here, physically based forward models of radar scattering for individual vegetation types are inverted using a time-series approach to retrieve soil moisture while correcting for the effects of static roughness and dynamic vegetation. Compared with the past studies in homogeneous field scales, this paper performs a stringent test with the satellite data in the presence of terrain slope, subpixel heterogeneity, and vegetation growth. The retrieval process also addresses any deficiencies in the forward model by removing any time-averaged bias between model and observations and by adjusting the strength of vegetation contributions. The retrievals are assessed at 14 core validation sites representing a wide range of global soil and vegetation conditions over grass, pasture, shrub, woody savanna, corn, wheat, and soybean fields. The predictions of the forward models used agree with SMAP measurements to within 0.5 dB unbiased-root-mean-square error (ubRMSE) and −0.05 dB (bias) for both copolarizations. Soil moisture retrievals have an accuracy of 0.052 m3/m3ubRMSE, −0.015 m3/m3bias, and a correlation of 0.50, compared toin situmeasurements, thus meeting the accuracy target of 0.06 m3/m3ubRMSE. The successful retrieval demonstrates the feasibility of a physically based time series retrieval with L-band SAR data for characterizing soil moisture over diverse conditions of soil moisture, surface roughness, and vegetation.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations96
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207