MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2744782154 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2017.2733538

Estimation of Significant Wave Height From X-Band Marine Radar Images Based on Ensemble Empirical Mode Decomposition

2017· article· en· W2744782154 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Xinlong Liu, Weimin Huang, Eric W. Gill

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBuoyHilbert–Huang transformAmplitudeRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarRadarRadar imagingSignificant wave heightMode (computer interface)Normalization (sociology)Mean squared errorWind waveComputer scienceGeologyMathematicsPhysicsStatisticsWhite noiseTelecommunicationsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this letter, an ensemble empirical mode decomposition (EEMD)-based method is proposed to estimate significant wave height (SWH) from the X-band marine radar sea surface images. First, the data sequence in each radial direction of a radar subimage is decomposed by the EEMD into several intrinsic mode functions (IMFs). A normalization scheme is then applied to the IMFs to obtain their amplitude modulation components. Finally, by adopting a linear model, the SWH is estimated from the sum of the amplitudes from the second to the fifth modes. The method is tested using radar and buoy data collected in a sea trial off the east coast of Canada. The root-mean-square differences with respect to the buoy reference for the SWH estimations using the traditional signal-to-noise-based method, a recent shadowing-based method, and the proposed technique are 0.78, 0.48, and 0.36 m, respectively. The result indicates that the proposed technique produces improvement in the SWH measurements.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
GenreMethods

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

Citations59
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing LettersSame topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207