MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767921252 · doi:10.1109/jstars.2017.2761338

An Assessment of Temporal Decorrelation Compensation Methods for Forest Canopy Height Estimation Using Airborne L-Band Same-Day Repeat-Pass Polarimetric SAR Interferometry

2017· article· en· W2767921252 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité LavalCalifornia Institute of TechnologyJet Propulsion LaboratoryNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsDecorrelationRemote sensingLidarEnvironmental scienceSynthetic aperture radarInterferometric synthetic aperture radarRadarCanopyPolarimetryComputer scienceGeologyGeographyAlgorithmPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We assess and compare several algorithms to compensate for temporal decorrelation observed in repeat-pass L-band polarimetric interferometric synthetic aperture radar (PolInSAR) measurements of forest canopy height. The analysis is performed on data acquired with an approximately 45-min temporal baseline using the uninhabited aerial vehicle synthetic aperture radar collected in August 2009 over temperate and boreal forests of the U.S. state of Maine and the Canadian province of Québec. This investigation presents several compensation methods based on the classical random volume over ground model, which include fixing the value of the extinction parameter, fixing the temporal decorrelation magnitude, or varying temporal decorrelation estimates with height. We also compare results with the random motion over ground model. While these methods have been presented in the literature previously, a comparison of the different methods and an assessment of their height estimation accuracy applied to the same datasets have not yet been performed. In addition, we introduce the use of ancillary reference forest height data from airborne large footprint lidar to estimate model parameters and to mitigate solution ambiguities. We finally demonstrate that this mitigation strategy is robust and suitable for use with future spaceborne lidar missions such as the Global Ecosystems Dynamics Investigation. The resulting PolInSAR canopy height estimates correspond well with those obtained from coincident field and airborne lidar data. Height estimation differences of 3.4 m (RMSE) were observed between the PolInSAR- and lidar-derived canopy height maps when using the fixed extinction method. These can be partially attributed to inherent differences in the sensor spatial resolutions and geolocation accuracy. The RMS error between the PolInSAR height estimates and the field collected Lorey's heights was 2.4 m.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.930
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.308 · 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