MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040364706 · doi:10.1080/01431161.2020.1754494

Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) image processing for operational space-based agriculture mapping

2020· article· en· W3040364706 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsComputer scienceSynthetic aperture radarRemote sensingFilter (signal processing)TerrainSpeckle noiseSpeckle patternArtificial intelligenceComputer visionGeographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Few countries are using space-based Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) to operationally produce national-scale maps of their agricultural landscapes. For the past ten years, Canada has integrated C-band SAR with optical satellite data to map what crops are grown in every field, for the entire country. While the advantages of SAR are well understood, the barriers to its operational use include the lack of familiarity with SAR data by agricultural end-user agencies and the lack of a ‘blueprint’ on how to implement an operational SAR-based mapping system. This research reviewed order of operations for SAR data processing and how order choice affects processing time and classification outcomes. Additionally this research assessed the impact of speckle filtering by testing three filter types (adaptive, multi-temporal and multi-resolution) at varying window sizes for three study sites with different average field sizes. The Touzi multi-resolution filter achieved the highest overall classification accuracies for all three sites with varying window sizes, and with only a small (< 2%) difference in accuracy relative to the Gamma Maximum A Posteriori (MAP) adaptive filter which had similar window sizes across sites. As such, the assessment of order of operations for noise reduction and terrain correction was completed using the Gamma MAP adaptive filter. This research found there was no difference in classification accuracies regardless of whether noise reduction was applied before or after terrain correction. However, implementing the terrain correction as the first operation resulted in a 10 to 50% increase in processing time. This is an important consideration when designing and delivering operational systems, especially for large geographies like Canada where hundreds of SAR images are required. These findings will encourage country-wide, regional and global food monitoring initiatives to consider SAR sensors as an important source of data to operationally map agricultural production.

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.734
Threshold uncertainty score0.727

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.219 · 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