MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3176304181 · doi:10.1109/jstars.2021.3089874

CP-IRGS: A Region-Based Segmentation of Multilook Complex Compact Polarimetric SAR Data

2021· article· en· W3176304181 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mohsen Ghanbari, David A. Clausi, Linlin Xu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarPolarimetryComputer scienceSegmentationWishart distributionRemote sensingArtificial intelligenceComputer visionCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Image segmentationAlgorithmPhysicsOpticsScatteringGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian RADARSAT constellation mission (RCM) is represented by three synthetic aperture radar (SAR) satellites, each of which includes a compact polarimetry (CP) mode. CP is advantageous because it provides increased backscatter information relative to single and conventional dual-polarized modes and has larger swath widths relative to a quad polarization mode. CP captures single-look complex data which can be used to derive the multilook complex (MLC) coherence matrix, or, equivalently, the Stokes vector data of the backscattered field. The challenge is to develop computer vision algorithms that can be used to effectively segment the scene using this new data source. An unsupervised region-based segmentation approach has been designed and implemented that utilizes the complex Wishart distribution characteristic of the MLC CP data. The segmentation method is based on the iterative region growing with semantics algorithm originally designed for single and dual pol intensity SAR data. The algorithm has been tested using both simulated CP SAR images and a pair of available quad polarization SAR images. The results demonstrate that the CP-IRGS algorithm provides more accurate segmentation images than those using only the RH and RV channel intensity images.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207