MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2891271911 · doi:10.1109/jstars.2018.2866059

Radar Forest Height Estimation in Mountainous Terrain Using Tandem-X Coherence Data

2018· article· en· W2891271911 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Hao Chen, S.R. Cloude, D.G. Goodenough, David A. Hill, Andrea Nesdoly

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersMinistry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations
KeywordsRemote sensingTerrainLidarTree canopyCanopySatelliteRadarElevation (ballistics)Digital elevation modelComputer scienceCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Environmental scienceGeologyGeographyMathematicsTelecommunicationsStatisticsCartographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we consider the problem of radar estimation of forest canopy height in regions with dense forests and severe topography. We combine a reference digital elevation model with multiple satellite baselines from ascending and descending orbits to develop a merging algorithm relating single pass interferometric coherence to forest canopy height. We first describe the algorithm and processing steps used for height estimation and then apply the technique to a mountainous study site in British Columbia, Canada, using data from the Tandem-X satellite pair. We devise a new masking scheme to isolate potential problem areas in sloped terrain and apply the new merging algorithm by using multiple Tandem-X tracks to overcome the gaps left due to the masking procedure. The radar height products are validated by using a network of ground forest measurement sites and supporting lidar. The regression statistics show an r <sup xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">2</sup> of 0.70 and rmse of 4.1 m between the radar and the field measured heights. By examining height errors, we implement a new test for the presence of canopy extinction, or subcanopy surface scattering, and demonstrate that in the dense and mountainous forests of British Columbia, there are significant canopy extinction effects in X-band imagery.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.971
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations43
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207