MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2774571070 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2017.8127448

Improved detection of icebergs in sea ice with RADARSAT-2 polarimetric data

2017· article· en· W2774571070 on OpenAlexafffund
Igor Zakharov, Desmond Power, Mark Howell, Sherry Warren

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicCryospheric studies and observations
Canadian institutionsCentre For Cold Ocean Resources Engineering
FundersCanadian Space AgencyResearch and Development Corporation of Newfoundland and Labrador
KeywordsIcebergSea iceRemote sensingPolarimetrySynthetic aperture radarSatelliteNovelty detectionGeologyClimatologyNoveltyEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information on icebergs and ice islands is important for climate science and for various marine operations in Arctic and Antarctic. This work investigates capabilities of RADARSAT-2 polarimetric data for detection of icebergs in sea ice. Several iceberg detectors were analyzed with the full polarimetric data acquired in Fine Quad and Fine Quad Wide modes. The results of iceberg detection were validated with the information extracted from very high and medium resolution electro-optical satellite data including stereo datasets. It was demonstrated that the accuracy of iceberg detection depends on polarimetric bands, parameters of detection algorithm and sea ice types. The novelty of the work also includes a demonstration of detection characteristics including false alarm rates. Improvement of detection results for icebergs in pack ice was achieved using Pauli decomposition components, span and advancing detection algorithm.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations12
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCryospheric studies and observations→French-language works237,207→