MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3034252284 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2020.2996415

Exploiting the Potential of Coastal GNSS-R for Improving Storm Surge Modeling

2020· article· en· W3034252284 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaohui Li, Dongkai Yang, Guoqi Han, Lei Yang, Jiuke Wang, Jingsong Yang, Dake Chen, Gang Zheng

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersState Key Laboratory of Satellite Ocean Environment DynamicsNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsTyphoonGNSS applicationsStorm surgeMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceHindcastTide gaugeStormSatelliteClimatologyGeostationary orbitWind speedTropical cycloneGeologySea levelOceanographyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The potential mymargin for improving storm surge simulation is demonstrated by using winds derived from ground-based Global Navigation Satellite System Reflectometry (GNSS-R) that uses BeiDou geostationary Earth orbit (GEO) satellite signals. We reconstruct wind fields by blending GNSS-R coastal winds with the European Center for Median Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) reanalysis product. The reconstructed winds agree well with the weather station data collected at Yangjiang in Guangdong, China. The ECMWF winds and the reconstructed winds are used to force a storm surge model off the Chinese coast during typhoon Utor 2013, respectively. The model storm surges forced by the reconstructed winds agree substantially better with tide-gauge observations than those forced by the ECMWF winds. The average error has been reduced by 30.5% from 24.3 cm with the ECMWF winds to 16.9 cm with the reconstructed winds. This letter suggests that GNSS-R coastal winds can have a positive impact on the accuracy of storm surge hindcasting directly and forecasting indirectly by improving the initial conditions.

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 score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing LettersSame topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207