MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887791927 · doi:10.3390/rs10081242

Ocean Wave Measurement Using Short-Range K-Band Narrow Beam Continuous Wave Radar

2018· article· en· W2887791927 on OpenAlexaff
Jian Cui, Ralf Bachmayer, Brad deYoung, Weimin Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadarWave radarWind waveSurface waveGeologySignificant wave heightWave heightDoppler effectOpticsContinuous-wave radarContinuous waveRemote sensingRadar imagingPhysicsTelecommunicationsLaserComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe a technique to measure ocean wave period, height and direction. The technique is based on the characteristics of transmission and backscattering of short-range K-band narrow beam continuous wave radar at the sea surface. The short-range K-band radar transmits and receives continuous signals close to the sea surface at a low-grazing angle. By sensing the motions of a dominant facet at the sea surface that strongly scatters signals back and is located directly in front of the radar, the wave orbital velocity can be measured from the Doppler shift of the received radar signal. The period, height and direction of ocean wave are determined from the relationships among wave orbital velocity, ocean wave characteristics and the Doppler shift. Numerical simulations were performed to validate that the dominant facet exists and ocean waves are measured by sensing its motion. Validation experiments were conducted in a wave tank to verify the feasibility of the proposed ocean wave measurement method. The results of simulations and experiments demonstrate the effectiveness of the short-range K-band narrow beam continuous wave radar for the measurement of ocean waves.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.175 · 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.

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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207