MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2999475767 · doi:10.4095/321454

Evaluating simulated compact polarimetry for Emergency Geomatics Service flood mapping

2020· report· en· W2999475767 on OpenAlexaffabout
T Rainville, Ian Olthof

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeomaticsFlood mythPolarimetryService (business)Remote sensingGeographyComputer scienceTornadoCartographyMeteorologyBusinessPhysicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When severe flooding occurs in Canada, the Emergency Geomatics Service (EGS) is tasked with creating and disseminating maps that depict the flood extent in near real time. These maps delineate open water and flooded vegetation and are created using a combination of raster image processing, machine learning classification, and threshold-based region growing. The predominant data source used to create these maps is synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery from RADARSAT-2 (R2). With the commissioning phase of the RADARSAT Constellation Mission (RCM) nearing completion, the EGS must adapt its methods for use with what is expected to be the EGS's new default source of SAR data. The introduction of RCM's circular-transmit linear-receive (CTLR) beam mode provides the option to exploit compact polarimetric (CP) information not previously available through R2. The aim of this study is to determine the most effective CP parameters for use in mapping open water and flooded vegetation by applying current EGS methodologies, as well as to assess the quality of these products in comparison to products created using R2 data. Nineteen quad-polarization R2 scenes selected from three regions prone to springtime flooding were used to create reference flood maps using current EGS methodologies. These scenes were also used to simulate RCM CP data that included 22 parameters at three different noise floors and spatial resolutions representative of three RCM beam modes. Using a multi-criteria ranking procedure, CP parameters were ranked in order of importance and entered into a stepwise classification procedure for evaluation against reference R2 products. Results suggest the top four CP parameters - m-chi-volume or m-delta-volume, RR intensity, Shannon Entropy intensity (SEi), and RV intensity - achieved a minimum omission and commission, and maximum agreement with baseline R2 products when evaluated across all 19 scenes and three beam modes. Separability analyses between manually delineated flooded vegetation polygons and other land cover classes identified four candidate CP parameters - RH intensity, RR intensity, SEi, and the first Stokes parameter (SV0) - suitable for threshold-based flooded vegetation region growing. Region growing thresholds based on CP values beneath flooded vegetation polygons were found to be dependent on incidence angle for each of these four parameters. After region growing flooded vegetation using established threshold values for each of the four candidate CP parameters, results were evaluated against flooded vegetation polygons to assess omission error, and against upland land cover to assess commission error, wherein RH intensity was deemed best to map flooded vegetation. The results of the study are a set of suitable CP parameters to generate flood maps from RCM data using current EGS methodologies that must be verified and validated further once real RCM data become available.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.375
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 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207