Airborne observations of arctic-boreal water surface elevations from AirSWOT Ka-Band InSAR and LVIS LiDAR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract AirSWOT is an experimental airborne Ka-band radar interferometer developed by NASA-JPL as a validation instrument for the forthcoming NASA Surface Water and Ocean Topography (SWOT) satellite mission. In 2017, AirSWOT was deployed as part of the NASA Arctic Boreal Vulnerability Experiment (ABoVE) to map surface water elevations across Alaska and western Canada. The result is the most extensive known collection of near-nadir airborne Ka-band interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) data and derivative high-resolution (3.6 m pixel) digital elevation models to produce water surface elevation (WSE) maps. This research provides a synoptic assessment of the 2017 AirSWOT ABoVE dataset to quantify regional WSE errors relative to coincident in situ field surveys and LiDAR data acquired from the NASA Land, Vegetation, and Ice Sensor (LVIS) airborne platform. Results show that AirSWOT WSE data can penetrate cloud cover and have nearly twice the swath-width of LVIS as flown for ABoVE (3.2 km vs. 1.8 km nominal swath-width). Despite noise and biases, spatially averaged AirSWOT WSEs can be used to estimate sub-seasonal hydrologic variability, as confirmed with field GPS surveys and in situ pressure transducers. This analysis informs AirSWOT ABoVE data users of known sources of measurement error in the WSEs as influenced by radar parameters including incidence angle, magnitude, coherence, and elevation uncertainty. The analysis also provides recommended best practices for extracting information from the dataset by using filters for these four parameters. Improvements to data handing would significantly increase the accuracy and spatial coverage of future AirSWOT WSE data collections, aiding scientific surface water studies, and improving the platform’s capability as an airborne validation instrument for SWOT.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".