MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888289639 · doi:10.1080/01431161.2018.1512768

Full-polarimetric burn scar mapping – the differences of active fire and post-fire situations

2018· article· en· W2888289639 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Simon Plank, Susanne Karg, Sandro Martinis

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersIndian Space Research OrganisationJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarEnvironmental sciencePolarimetryBackscatter (email)SatelliteSmokeComputer scienceMeteorologyGeologyScatteringGeographyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Fire is a threat to human lives, infrastructure, and forestry. Satellite-based Earth observations enable a fast, efficient, and reliable estimation of burnt area. In most cases, optical satellite data are used for burn scar detection. However, smoke and cloud coverage strongly limits the suitability of optical imagery for rapid mapping of burn scars. Here, an automated procedure based on quad-polarized L-band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) data is presented to enable fast burn scar mapping independently of the weather and smoke conditions. Full-polarimetric SAR data enable the decomposition of the SAR backscatter into different scattering mechanisms, describing the scatterer more precisely. Important differences in the polarimetric backscattering behaviour during the active fire and post-fire situations are reported. While the SPAN difference is best suited for burn scar mapping during active fire situations, the Entropy-Anisotropy-Alpha and the generalized Freeman–Durden decompositions showed the best suitability for burnt area mapping several months after the end of the fire. The proposed methodology is an object-based image analysis approach based on change detection. The big fire event which affected Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada, in May–June 2016 was investigated as a case study.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.268

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations7
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Remote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207