MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155201462 · doi:10.4236/ns.2022.143013

Effect of the Instrument Slit Function on Upwelling Radiance from a Wavelength Dependent Surface Reflectance

2022· article· en· W3155201462 on OpenAlexafffund
Rajinder K. Jagpal, Rehan Siddiqui, Sanjar M. Abrarov, Brendan M. Quine

Bibliographic record

VenueNatural Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsThoth Technology (Canada)York University
FundersYork University
KeywordsRadianceRemote sensingSpectrometerUpwellingWavelengthEnvironmental scienceRange (aeronautics)ComputationOpticsReflectivityImaging spectrometerGeologyPhysicsMaterials scienceComputer scienceAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Radiance Enhancement (RE) method was introduced for efficient detection of clouds from the space. Recently, we have also reported that due to high reflectance of combustion-originated smokes, this approach can also be generalized for detection of the forest fires by retrieving and analyzing datasets collected from a space orbiting micro-spectrometer operating in the near infrared spectral range. In our previous publication, we have performed a comparison of observed and synthetic radiance spectra by developing a method for computation of surface reflectance consisting of different canopies by weighted sum based on their areal coverage. However, this approach should be justified by a method based on corresponding proportions of the upwelling radiance. The results of computations we performed in this study reveal a good match between areal coverage of canopies and the corresponding proportions of the upwelling radiance due to effect of the instrument slit function.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNatural ScienceSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207