MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2623997094 · doi:10.1109/jstars.2017.2707545

Correcting Satellite Passive Microwave Brightness Temperatures in Forested Landscapes Using Satellite Visible Reflectance Estimates of Forest Transmissivity

2017· article· en· W2623997094 on OpenAlexaff
Qinghuan Li, Richard Kelly

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemote sensingEnvironmental scienceSatelliteTree canopyEndmemberSpectroradiometerBrightness temperatureVegetation (pathology)CanopyMeteorologyBrightnessAtmospheric sciencesHyperspectral imagingPhysicsReflectivityGeologyOpticsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest cover attenuation of microwave emission is a significant challenge to the estimation of snow accumulation from remote sensing microwave observations because canopy biomass attenuates the understory snowcover emission and produces additional emission to that generated by the snowpack and subnivean surface. Transmissivity of radiation is an important variable that describes how a tree canopy attenuates microwave emission from the ground. Although it can be measured in the field or estimated by models using field data at the in situ scale, the estimation of transmissivity at regional to global scales is a challenge. Following the work of Metsämäki et al. (2005), a transmissivity model that uses reflectance data from the moderate resolution imaging spectroradiometer is applied to estimate transmissivity at global scales. The influence of the vegetation attenuation and the emission on the brightness temperature (Tb), which is observed by advanced microwave scanning radiometer-Earth observing system sensor (Tbvegetation), can be calculated by comparing the Tb of the ground below-canopy (Tbground) with the Tb above the forest canopy (Tbac) during the presnow season. Linear regression models derived between transmissivity estimates and the Tbvegetationhad significant R2values of 0.76 (0.96) at 18 GHz vertical (horizontal) polarization and 0.91 (0.91) at 36 GHz vertical (horizontal) polarization.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote SensingSame topicCryospheric studies and observationsFrench-language works237,207