MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195404120 · doi:10.3390/rs13163315

InSAR Coherence Analysis for Wetlands in Alberta, Canada Using Time-Series Sentinel-1 Data

2021· article· en· W3195404120 on OpenAlexaffabout
Meisam Amani, Valentin Poncoș, Brian Brisco, Fatemeh Foroughnia, Evan R. DeLancey, Sadegh Ranjbar

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsAlberta Biodiversity Monitoring InstituteUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandInterferometric synthetic aperture radarRemote sensingCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Environmental scienceSynthetic aperture radarHydrology (agriculture)GeologyEcologyMathematicsStatisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wetlands are valuable natural resources which provide numerous services to the environment. Many studies have demonstrated the potential of various types of remote sensing datasets and techniques for wetland mapping and change analysis. However, there are a relatively low number of studies that have investigated the application of the Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) coherence products for wetland studies, especially over large areas. Therefore, in this study, coherence products over the entire province of Alberta, Canada (~661,000 km2) were generated using the Sentinel-1 data acquired from 2017 to 2020. Then, these products along with large amount of wetland reference samples were employed to assess the separability of different wetland types and their trends over time. Overall, our analyses showed that coherence can be considered as an added value feature for wetland classification and monitoring. The Treed Bog and Shallow Open Water classes showed the highest and lowest coherence values, respectively. The Treed Wetland and Open Wetland classes were easily distinguishable. When analyzing the wetland subclasses, it was observed that the Treed Bog and Shallow Open Water classes can be easily discriminated from other subclasses. However, there were overlaps between the signatures of the other wetland subclasses, although there were still some dates where these classes were also distinguishable. The analysis of multi-temporal coherence products also showed that the coherence products generated in spring/fall (e.g., May and October) and summer (e.g., July) seasons had the highest and lowest coherence values, respectively. It was also observed that wetland classes preserved coherence during the leaf-off season (15 August–15 October) while they had relatively lower coherence during the leaf-on season (i.e., 15 May–15 August). Finally, several suggestions for future studies were provided.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations21
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207