Comparing Assimilation of Soil Moisture and C-band Backscatter in High Resolution Land Surface Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian Space Agency (CSA) has recently started receiving and processing the images from the recently launched C-band RADARSAT Constellation Mission (RCM). The backscatter and soil moisture retrievals products from the previously launched RADARSAT-2 agree well with both in-situ measurements and surface soil moisture modeled with land surface model Soil, Vegetation, and Snow (SVS). RCM will provide those products at an even better spatial coverage and temporal resolution. In preparation of the potential operational application of RCM products in Canadian Meteorological Center (CMC), this paper presents the scenarios of assimilating either soil moisture retrieval or outright backscatter signal in a 100-meter resolution version of the Canadian Land Data Assimilation System (CaLDAS) on field scale with time interval of three hours. The soil moisture retrieval map was synthesized by extrapolating the regression relationship between in-situ measurements and open loop model output based on soil texture lookup table. Based on this, the backscatter map was then generated with the surface roughness retrieved from RADARSAT-2 images using a modified Integral Equation Model (IEM) model. Bias correction was applied to the Ensemble Kalman filter (EnKF) to mitigate the impact of nonlinear errors introduced by multi-sourced perturbations. Initial results show that the assimilation of backscatter is as effective as assimilating soil moisture retrievals. Compared to open loop, both can improve the analysis of surface moisture, particularly in terms of reducing bias.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".