MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951943849 · doi:10.22215/etd/2017-12136

Assessing the potential of interferometric SAR for monitoring linear transportation infrastructure: case studies from Eastern Ontario

2017· dissertation· en· W2951943849 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Oliver

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterferometric synthetic aperture radarInterferometryRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarNoise (video)GeographyComputer scienceGeodesyGeologyImage (mathematics)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two RADARSAT-2 Spotlight (SLA24 and SLA74), and one Sentinel-1A (IW) SAR datasets are used to assess the potential of InSAR for monitoring linear transportation infrastructure subject to geohazards. A variety of case studies in Cornwall, Ontario are examined. An InSAR processing sequence was established for the RADARSAT-2 datasets; 19 SLA24 and 15 SLA74 images were used to create time-series deformation maps of Cornwall spanning March 2015 to September 2016. The noise floors were ± 1.5 cm and ± 1.0 cm, respectively. Phase unwrapping errors, atmospheric path delay, and limited SAR data were identified as the largest contributors to noise. The InSAR processing sequence was adapted to the Sentinel-1A dataset, and used to create unwrapped differential interferograms. A discussion of the phase components of these interferograms is presented. Large SAR datasets, small incidence angles, moderate image resolution, and 6-12 day revisit periods are recommended for monitoring linear transportation infrastructure.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.293 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207