MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111671256 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2020.3039739

Incidence Angle Dependence of Texture Statistics From Sentinel-1 HH-Polarization Images of Winter Arctic Sea Ice

2020· article· en· W3111671256 on OpenAlexafffund
Randall K. Scharien, Sasha Nasonova

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsASL Environmental Sciences (Canada)University of Victoria
FundersScience and Engineering Research CouncilPolar Knowledge Canada
KeywordsSea iceSynthetic aperture radarArcticRemote sensingNormalization (sociology)GeologyArtificial intelligenceBackscatter (email)ScatteringImage textureComputer scienceClimatologyImage processingOpticsPhysicsImage (mathematics)TelecommunicationsOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The proliferation of synthetic aperture radar (SAR) imagery, its accessibility in open platforms like Google Earth Engine, and the development of automated classification and geophysical information extraction algorithms have prompted the need for understanding the role of incidence angle (IA) on radar scattering mechanism, backscatter intensity, and classification accuracy. This letter demonstrates the dependence of image texture parameters on SAR IA, using Arctic landfast sea ice samples extracted from C-band frequency Sentinel-1 SAR scenes collected during the winter period. Gray-level cooccurrence matrix (GLCM) derived texture parameters, and occurrence texture parameters, derived from undeformed first-year sea ice and multi-year sea ice, which are dominated by surface and volume scattering mechanisms, respectively, were analyzed. All GLCM texture parameters were found to be dependent on IA, highlighting the need for consideration of angular dependence in texture parameters, particularly in the development of image classification and inversion algorithms utilizing them. Occurrence texture parameters showed negligible influence by IA; however, feature discrimination capability was also lost. Some GLCM parameters had similar angular dependencies for both sea ice types, suggesting that, in some cases, global image normalization approaches for texture may be applied to account for the IA effect.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing LettersSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207