MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901008353 · doi:10.1109/igarss.2018.8518170

Sentinel-1 & Sentinel-2 for SOIL Moisture Retrieval at Field Scale

2018· article· en· W2901008353 on OpenAlexaff
Francesco Mattia, Anna Balenzano, Giuseppe Satalino, Francesco Lovergine, Jian Peng, U. Wegmüller, Oliver Cartus, Malcolm Davidson, S. Kim, Joel T. Johnson, Jeffrey P. Walker, Xiaoling Wu, Valentijn Pauwels, Heather McNairn, Todd G. Caldwell, Michael H. Cosh, Thomas J. Jackson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater contentEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingSoil textureScale (ratio)MoistureEarth observationSoil scienceMeteorologySoil waterGeologySatelliteGeographyEngineeringCartographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soil moisture content is an essential climate variable that is operationally delivered at low resolution (e.g. 36-9 km) by earth observation missions, such as ESA/SMOS, NASA/SMAP and EUMETSAT/ASCAT. However numerous land applications would benefit from the availability of soil moisture maps at higher resolution. For this reason, there is a large research effort to develop soil moisture products at higher resolution using, for instance, data acquired by the new ESA's Sentinel missions. The objective of this study is twofold. First, it presents the validation status of a pre-operational soil moisture product derived from Sentinel-1 at 1 km resolution. Second, it assesses the possibility of integrating Sentinel-2 data and additional ancillary information, such as parcel borders and high resolution soil texture maps, in order to obtain soil moisture maps at “field scale” resolution, i.e. ~0.1 km. Case studies concerning agricultural sites located in Europe are presented.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.175
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.002

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 head0.246
Teacher spread0.235 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations21
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207