MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3089238151 · doi:10.1109/joe.2020.3009770

A New Automatic Nonlinear Optimization-Based Method for Directional Ocean Wave Spectrum Extraction From Monostatic HF-Radar Data

2020· article· en· W3089238151 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Reza Shahidi, Eric W. Gill

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWave radarRadarBuoyWind waveRemote sensingWave heightElectromagnetic spectrumDoppler effectComputer scienceNonlinear systemDoppler radarArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmGeologyContinuous-wave radarRadar imagingPhysicsOpticsTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The extraction of oceanic wave spectrum information from radar data has been a challenging problem that has been the subject of a vast amount of research over the past several decades. This research has resulted in a multitude of approaches to extract ocean wave spectra from Doppler spectrum returns. One common feature of many of these methods is the reduction of the wave spectrum extraction problem from a nonlinear problem to a linear one. In this article, a new approach is introduced, which does not linearize the Fredholm integral equation relating the ocean wave spectrum to the radar Doppler spectrum, but instead maintains its nonlinear nature. Also, unlike previous nonlinear optimization solutions, the proposed method is automatic in the sense that no regularization parameters have to be manually set purely dependent on the radar data from which the ocean wave parameters are being extracted, thereby reducing the need for human intervention in the wave spectrum extraction process. In addition to describing this new method for wave spectrum extraction, this article presents results from a case study on field data from Argentia, NL, Canada, comparing the oceanographic parameters obtained with the proposed method to those recorded by in situ buoy instrumentation. The significant wave height calculated from ocean wave spectra extracted via the method are found to match with those from the buoy, whereas the values of other oceanographic parameters, such as wave period and direction extracted using the proposed method, are less accurate potentially due to the low quality of data available to test the method.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.613

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.249
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

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
GenreMethods

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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Oceanic EngineeringSame topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207