MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963813343 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2019.2924868

Detection of First-Year and Multi-Year Sea Ice from Dual-Polarization SAR Images Under Cold Conditions

2019· article· en· W2963813343 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alexander S. Komarov, Mark Buehner

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersCanadian Space AgencyEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarSea icePixelRemote sensingComputer scienceAlgorithmGeologyArtificial intelligencePhysicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a new technique for automated detection of multi-year (MY) and first-year (FY) sea ice from RADARSAT-2 dual-polarization HH–HV ScanSAR Wide images under cold environmental conditions. The approach is applied to 2.05 km <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$\times2.05$ </tex-math></inline-formula> km ( <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$41 \times 41$ </tex-math></inline-formula> pixels) spatial window in the situation where the area is labeled as ice by our recently introduced ice and open water detection approach. The probability of the presence of MY ice is modeled as a function of the two selected predictor parameters computed over each spatial window: the HV/HH polarization ratio and the standard deviation of the HV signal. The proposed MY ice probability model was built based on thousands of synthetic aperture radar (SAR) images and corresponding Canadian Ice Service (CIS) Image Analysis products covering the 2010–2016 time period, not including 2013. Our verification results for the independent testing subset for the year 2013 against the CIS Image Analysis products suggest that approximately 50% of pure MY and FY ice samples were classified with an accuracy of 98.2%. The incidence angle correction of HH and HV backscatter does not improve MY and FY ice detection results in the space of the selected predictor parameters. The proposed technique will be used as part of the Environment and Climate Change Canada Regional Ice-Ocean Prediction System in support of assimilation of ice thickness retrievals from Cryosat-2 and Soil Moisture and Ocean Salinity mission data.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.796
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations32
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207