MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894981400 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2018.2870716

Demystifying the Capability of Sublook Correlation Techniques for Vessel Detection in SAR Imagery

2018· article· en· W2894981400 on OpenAlexaff
Christoph H. Gierull

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarComputer scienceConstant false alarm rateDetectorRemote sensingFalse alarmDoppler effectNoise (video)Emphasis (telecommunications)Radar imagingInverse synthetic aperture radarRadarImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligenceGeologyTelecommunicationsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the attainable performance of various Doppler sublook or subband cross correlation techniques for vessel detection in synthetic aperture radar images. Research from the past two decades claims that these techniques were capable of improving the detection of small ships in challenging maritime environments. Despite many published experimental examples, a thorough analytical investigation corroborating this claim is noticeably absent. This paper is based on a rigorous theoretical analysis founded on the statistical properties of a textured sea surface model in thermal noise with simultaneous consideration of a constant false alarm rate. Emphasis has been placed on the correct accounting for detrimental physical effects caused by the Doppler spectrum being split into nonoverlapping parts, which have not been sufficiently considered in the literature to date. The theoretical results are confirmed via simulations and are substantiated with real RADARSAT-2 data. The analysis in this paper has neither found theoretical nor empirical evidence that sublook correlation techniques outperform the classical detector based on the image magnitude.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.238
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
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

Citations16
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