Comparison of Compact and Fully Polarimetric SAR for Multitemporal Wetland Monitoring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spaceborne Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) instruments are effective tools for monitoring and mapping wetlands. With the availability of SAR instruments providing various polarization options, the scope of this study is to evaluate the new compact polarization for wetland multitemporal change detection using simulated RADARSAT Constellation Mission (RCM) SAR data. A series of fully polarimetric (FP) SAR images were collected over a test site located in Ontario, Canada, and used to simulate RCM compact polarimetric (CP) data. The simulated data were evaluated for multitemporal change detection and the results were compared to those from FP SAR data. WorldView imagery and water level data were used for analysis and validation of the change detection results. The study shows potential for using the CP SAR for multitemporal change detection over three major wetland classes: shallow water, marsh, and swamp. Although FP SAR was slightly more effective in multitemporal change detection compared to CP SAR, the percentage of agreement between the change detection results of FP and CP SAR was always greater than 90% for all wetland classes. The highest overall percentage of agreement (98.4%) between the results of FP and CP SAR was observed over the shallow water, while the lowest (92.5%) was observed over swamp.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".