Permafrost Dynamics Observatory—Part I: Postprocessing and Calibration Methods of UAVSAR L‐Band InSAR Data for Seasonal Subsidence Estimation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) has been used to quantify a range of surface and near surface physical properties in permafrost landscapes. Most previous InSAR studies have utilized spaceborne InSAR platforms, but InSAR datasets over permafrost landscapes collected from airborne platforms have been steadily growing in recent years. Most existing algorithms dedicated toward retrieval of permafrost physical properties were originally developed for spaceborne InSAR platforms. In this study, which is the first in a two part series, we introduce a series of calibration techniques developed to apply a novel joint retrieval algorithm for permafrost active layer thickness retrieval to an airborne InSAR dataset acquired in 2017 by NASA's Uninhabited Aerial Vehicle Synthetic Aperture Radar over Alaska and Western Canada. We demonstrate how InSAR measurement uncertainties are mitigated by these calibration methods and quantify remaining measurement uncertainties with a novel method of modeling interferometric phase uncertainty using a Gaussian mixture model. Finally, we discuss the impact of native SAR resolution on InSAR measurements, the limitation of using few interferograms per retrieval, and the implications of our findings for cross-comparison of airborne and spaceborne InSAR datasets acquired over Arctic regions underlain by permafrost.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".