MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909476721 · doi:10.1109/oceans.2018.8604842

Gaussian Process Regression for Estimating Wind Speed From X-band Marine Radar Images

2018· article· en· W2909476721 on OpenAlexaffabout
Xinwei Chen, Weimin Huang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRadarWind speedAnemometerHistogramRemote sensingBinRadar imagingWind directionKrigingComputer scienceMeteorologyGeologyArtificial intelligenceMathematicsAlgorithmStatisticsGeographyImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Gaussian process regression (GPR) based method for estimating wind speed from X-band marine radar images is proposed. The dependence of histogram pattern of radar images on wind speed and rain condition is first observed. Then the feature vectors based on bin values of histograms are extracted. Two models, which estimate wind speed from rain-free and rain-contaminated images respectively, are trained using GPR algorithm. Radar and anemometer data collected from a sea trial near Halifax, Canada are used for validation. Compared to the ensemble empirical mode decomposition (EEMD) based methods, the accuracy of wind speed estimation is further improved with a reduction of about 0.13 m/s for rain-free images and 0.18 m/s for rain-contaminated images in root mean square deviation (RMSD).

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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207