MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3015059946 · doi:10.3390/s20072008

Wavelength-Resolution SAR Ground Scene Prediction Based on Image Stack

2020· article· en· W3015059946 on OpenAlexaff
Bruna G. Palm, Dimas Irion Alves, Mats I. Pettersson, Viet T. Vu, Renato Machado, Renato J. Cintra, Fábio M. Bayer, Patrik Dammert, Hans Hellsten

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoSaabCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsConstant false alarm rateArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)Computer scienceComputer visionRemote sensingFalse alarmSynthetic aperture radarWavelengthMean-shiftPattern recognition (psychology)GeographyPhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents five different statistical methods for ground scene prediction (GSP) in wavelength-resolution synthetic aperture radar (SAR) images. The GSP image can be used as a reference image in a change detection algorithm yielding a high probability of detection and low false alarm rate. The predictions are based on image stacks, which are composed of images from the same scene acquired at different instants with the same flight geometry. The considered methods for obtaining the ground scene prediction include (i) autoregressive models; (ii) trimmed mean; (iii) median; (iv) intensity mean; and (v) mean. It is expected that the predicted image presents the true ground scene without change and preserves the ground backscattering pattern. The study indicates that the the median method provided the most accurate representation of the true ground. To show the applicability of the GSP, a change detection algorithm was considered using the median ground scene as a reference image. As a result, the median method displayed the probability of detection of 97 % and a false alarm rate of 0 . 11 / km 2 , when considering military vehicles concealed in a forest.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207