MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160570628 · doi:10.3390/rs13091832

Validation of NOAA CyGNSS Wind Speed Product with the CCMP Data

2021· article· en· W3160570628 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaohui Li, Dongkai Yang, Jingsong Yang, Guoqi Han, Gang Zheng, Weiqiang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Zhejiang ProvinceState Key Laboratory of Satellite Ocean Environment DynamicsMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationChinese Academy of SciencesNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsWind speedEnvironmental scienceMeteorologyCyclone (programming language)ClimatologyStandard deviationRemote sensingStatisticsMathematicsComputer scienceGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Cyclone Global Navigation Satellite System (CyGNSS) mission was launched in December 2016, which can remotely sense sea surface wind with a relatively high spatio-temporal resolution for tracking tropical cyclones. In recent years, with the gradual development of the geophysical model function (GMF) for CyGNSS wind retrieval, different versions of CyGNSS Level 2 products have been released and their performance has gradually improved. This paper presents a comprehensive evaluation of CyGNSS wind product v1.1 produced by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). The Cross-Calibrated Multi-Platform (CCMP) analysis wind (v02.0 and v02.1 near real time) products produced by Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) were used as the reference. Data pairs between the NOAA CyGNSS and RSS CCMP products were processed and evaluated by the bias and standard deviation SD. The CyGNSS dataset covers the period between May 2017 and December 2020. The statistical comparisons show that the bias and SD of CyGNSS relative to CCMP-nonzero collocations when the flag of CCMP winds is nonzero are –0.05 m/s and 1.19 m/s, respectively. The probability density function (PDF) of the CyGNSS winds coincides with that of CCMP-nonzero. Furthermore, the average monthly bias and SD show that CyGNSS wind is consistent and reliable generally. We found that negative deviation mainly appears at high latitudes in both hemispheres. Positive deviation appears in the China Sea, the Arabian Sea, and the west of Africa and South America. Spatial–temporal analysis demonstrates the geographical anomalies in the bias and SD of the CyGNSS winds, confirming that the wind speed bias shows a temporal dependency. The verification and comparison show that the remotely sensed wind speed measurements from NOAA CyGNSS wind product v1.1 are in good agreement with CCMP winds.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.434
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207