MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036494218 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2020.3000672

Ice Concentration From Dual-Polarization SAR Images Using Ice and Water Retrievals at Multiple Spatial Scales

2020· article· en· W3036494218 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Alexander S. Komarov, Mark Buehner

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsPixelRemote sensingImage resolutionSynthetic aperture radarMean squared errorGeologyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new technique for automated retrieval of ice concentration from RADARSAT-2 dual-polarization HH-HV ScanSAR Wide images for subsequent assimilation in ice numerical models is presented. First, we extended our previously introduced ice and water detection approach operating at a 2.05 km x 2.05 km spatial scale to a set of 19 different spatial scales ranging from 2.05 km (41 pixels) down to 0.25 km (5 pixels). As the spatial resolution was increased, the overall accuracy of ice and water detection stayed at a very high level across all scales (between 99.5% and 99.8%), but the number of water retrievals substantially dropped. Second, we designed an approach for estimating ice concentration in a 2 km × 2 km (40 × 40 pixels) area consisting of 64 5 × 5 pixel blocks. The 5 × 5 pixel blocks which are initially classified as unknowns are iteratively combined in clusters with effective spatial scales larger than 5 pixels. The clusters are further classified as ice or water using the ice probability model corresponding to the effective spatial scale. The 40 x 40 pixel area becomes populated with high-resolution (5 x 5 pixels) ice and water retrievals, and the ice concentration is estimated based on the number of ice and water retrievals. The proposed approach produces a much better agreement with the Canadian Ice Service Image Analysis ice concentrations (rootmean-square error (RMSE) = 2.2%) compared to the original 2-km ice/water detection approach (RMSE = 19.9%). The developed technique will be adapted to the RADARSAT Constellation Mission data for data assimilation in Environment and Climate Change Canada Regional Ice-Ocean Prediction System.

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 score0.944
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.194 · 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

Citations20
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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