MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887342164 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2018.2854736

High Spatio-Temporal Resolution Deformation Time Series With the Fusion of InSAR and GNSS Data Using Spatio-Temporal Random Effect Model

2018· article· en· W2887342164 on OpenAlexaff
Ning Liu, Wujiao Dai, Rock Santerre, Jun Hu, Qiang Shi, Changjiang Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsInterferometric synthetic aperture radarSynthetic aperture radarGNSS applicationsTemporal resolutionSensor fusionRemote sensingImage resolutionComputer scienceDeformation monitoringTime seriesSeries (stratigraphy)Ground truthGeologyKalman filterInterpolation (computer graphics)GeodesyDeformation (meteorology)Global Positioning SystemArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High spatio-temporal resolution deformation series can be used to improve the understanding of deformation mechanism, thereby contributing to prevention and control of geological disasters such as mine subsidence, landslide, and earthquake. Among ground deformation monitoring technologies, global navigation satellite system has high temporal resolution but low spatial resolution, and interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) has high spatial resolution but low temporal resolution. Fusing these two data may generate high spatio-temporal resolution deformation series. Existing fusion methods usually use the bi-direction interpolation, which does not consider the spatio-temporal cross correlation and is computationally extensive. We propose a dynamic filtering fusion model based on the spatio-temporal random effect (a spatio-temporal Kalman filter) model. Experiments with simulated data and real data from the Los Angeles area are conducted to validate this method. Simulated experimental results are compared with truth data and the Los Angeles experiment data results are verified using the leave-one InSAR image-out validation method. The RMS results for them are around 13.8 and 5 mm, respectively, indicating that the proposed method can achieve high accuracy and high spatial-temporal resolution deformation time series.

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 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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.417

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations37
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207