MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945735632 · doi:10.1080/07038992.2019.1612236

Evaluation of C-Band SAR for Identification of Flooded Vegetation in Emergency Response Products

2019· article· en· W2945735632 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Brian Brisco, Yask Shelat, Kevin Murnaghan, Joshua Montgomery, Colleen E. Fuss, Ian Olthof, Chris Hopkinson, A. Deschamps, Valentin Poncoș

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeGovernment of Canada
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarVegetation (pathology)Environmental sciencePolarimetryFlood mythAncillary dataGeomaticsGeologyGeographyScattering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data set of the Peace Athabasca Delta, Alberta, was used to evaluate approaches to flooded vegetation mapping. A primary objective was to identify how to add a flooded vegetation layer to the Emergency Geomatics Service (EGS) SAR-derived flood products. Field data were used to identify non-flooded and flooded vegetation. A combination of statistical analyses and box plot visual inspection was used to evaluate the magnitude-only images, the polarimetric and compact polarimetric parameters/decompositions, and the coherence products for mapping flooded vegetation. This paper provides some background on the use of SAR for flood mapping, describes the data and processing methods, and presents the results of this comparison. To some degree all polarizations and techniques were effective for mapping flooded vegetation due to the increased backscatter intensity and the phase shift from the double bounce scattering. In particular, all polarization combinations, the HH/HV ratio, Shannon entropy, and the m-chi double bounce produce good separation. The water/vegetation interface remains coherent when flooded, also allowing flooded vegetation to be identified with seasonal coherence. These results demonstrate that the use of multi-mode RADARSAT Constellation Mission data for providing a flooded vegetation layer to EGS flood maps is possible.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations27
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207