MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803369220 · doi:10.1175/jtech-d-17-0175.1

A Simple and Effective Method for Separating Meteorological from Nonmeteorological Targets Using Dual-Polarization Data

2018· article· en· W2803369220 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alamelu Kilambi, Frédéric Fabry, Véronique Meunier

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicPrecipitation Measurement and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaGovernment of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRemote sensingFlaggingComputer scienceRadarDual-polarization interferometryWeather radarEnvironmental scienceEcho (communications protocol)Polarization (electrochemistry)MeteorologyGeologyPhysicsTelecommunicationsCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract To satisfy the needs of the meteorological and aeroecological communities wanting a simple but effective way of flagging each other’s unwanted echo for a variety of different operational radar systems, we evaluated the ability of an estimate of depolarization ratio (DR) based on differential reflectivity ( Z DR ) and copolar correlation coefficient ( ρ HV ) measurements to separate both types of echoes. The method was tested with data collected by S- and C-band radars used in the United States and Canada. The DR-based method that does not require training achieved 96% separation between weather and biological echoes. Since the misclassifications are typically caused by isolated pixels in the melting layer or at the edge of echo patterns, the addition of a despeckling algorithm considerably reduces further these false alarms, resulting in an increase in correct identification approaching 99% on test cases.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations42
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Atmospheric and Oceanic TechnologySame topicPrecipitation Measurement and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207