Comparison between Dense L-Band and C-Band Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Time Series for Crop Area Mapping over a NISAR Calibration-Validation Site
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crop area mapping is important for tracking agricultural production and supporting food security. Spaceborne approaches using synthetic aperture radar (SAR) now allow for mapping crop area at moderate spatial and temporal resolutions. Multi-frequency SAR data is highly useful for crop monitoring because backscatter response from vegetation canopies is wavelength dependent. This study evaluates the utility of C-band Sentinel-1B (Sentinel-1) and L-band ALOS-2 (PALSAR) data, collected during the 2019 growing season, for generating accurate active crop extent (crop vs. non-crop) classifications over an agricultural region in western Canada. Evaluations were performed against the Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada satellite-based Annual Cropland Inventory (ACI), an open data product that maps land cover across the extent of Canada’s agricultural land. Classifications were performed using the temporal coefficient of variation (CV) approach, where an optimal crop/non-crop delineating CV threshold (CVthr) is selected according to Youden’s J-statistic. Results show that crop area mapping agreed better with the ACI when using Sentinel-1 data (83.5%) compared to PALSAR (73.2%). Analysis of performance by crop reveals that PALSAR’s poorer performance can be attributed to soybean, urban, grassland, and pasture ACI classes. This study also compared CV values to in situ wet biomass data for canola and soybeans, showing that crops with lower biomass (soybean) had correspondingly lower CV values.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it