MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3196016684 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2021.3101455

Estimating Noise Floor in Sentinel-1 Images With Linear Programming and Least Squares

2021· article· en· W3196016684 on OpenAlexafffund
Peter Q. Lee, Linlin Xu, David A. Clausi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience 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 CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsComputer scienceNoise (video)Synthetic aperture radarRemote sensingRadarNoise floorComputer visionArtificial intelligenceGeologyTelecommunicationsNoise measurementImage (mathematics)Noise reduction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sentinel-1 is a synthetic aperture radar platform that provides free and open-source images of the Earth. A product type of Sentinel-1 is ground range detected (GRD), which records intensity while discarding phase information from the radar backscatter. Especially in cross-polarized GRD images, there are noticeable intensity changes throughout the image that are caused by amplifying the noise floor of the signal, which varies due to the nonuniform radiation pattern of the satellite’s antenna. While Sentinel-1 has instrument processing facility (IPF) software to estimate the noise floor, even in the newer versions (3.1 or above) of the IPF software there are still instances where the estimates provided do not fit the actual noise floor in the image, which is particularly noticeable in transitions between adjacent subswaths. In this work, we propose a method that reduces the impact of the varying noise-floor throughout the image. The method models the intensity of the noise floor to be a power function of the radiation pattern power. The method divides the swath into several sections depending on the location of the local minimum and maximum of the radiation pattern power with respect to the range. The parameter estimation is portrayed as a geometric programming problem that is transformed into a linear programming problem by logarithmic transformation. Affine offsets are computed for each subswath by a weighted least squares approach. Vast improvement is found on extra-wide (EW) and interferometric wide (IW) Sentinel-1 modes over cross-polarized images. Code implementation is available at <uri xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">https://github.com/PeterQLee/sentinel1_denoise_rs</uri> .

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.457

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207