MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197221586 · doi:10.1080/15481603.2021.1952542

Oil spill detection from Synthetic Aperture Radar Earth observations: a meta-analysis and comprehensive review

2021· article· en· W3197221586 on OpenAlexaff
Hamid Jafarzadeh, Masoud Mahdianpari, Saeid Homayouni, Fariba Mohammadimanesh, Mohammed Dabboor

Bibliographic record

VenueGIScience & Remote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicOil Spill Detection and Mitigation
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCentre For Cold Ocean Resources EngineeringGovernment of CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarOil spillGeologyEarth observationMeteorologyEnvironmental scienceGeographyEngineeringSatellitePetroleum engineeringAerospace engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Oil spills are one of the most hazardous disasters with significant short- and long-term effects on fragile marine ecosystems. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) has been considered an effective technology for mapping and monitoring oil spills in the marine environment, primarily thanks to its weather-, illumination-, and time-independent capabilities. To cope with serious oil spill threats, researchers have developed various analytical methodologies utilizing key advantages of SAR imagery to identify the occurrence of oil spills and discriminate lookalikes. Choosing the appropriate SAR specifications and investigating the effects of field conditions are challenging for oil spill monitoring and should be investigated further. This paper presents a comprehensive review study on maritime surveying and oil slick detection using SAR imagery through indexed research studies’ compilation and analysis. To this end, a total of 230 peer-reviewed papers, published in various remote sensing (RS) journals and 78 conference papers in the International Society for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing (ISPRS) archive and the IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS) proceedings were reviewed. Our review study represents a meta-analysis investigation of these papers focusing on several features, including data, sensor type, imaging mode, microwave carrier frequency (e.g., L-, C-, and X-bands), polarization option (i.e., single-pol, dual-pol, full-pol, and compact-pol), incidence angle, and wind speed. Furthermore, it provides an overview of the RS techniques developed to deal with the oil spill detection task. This paper can be a guideline for two groups of audiences; those interested in oil spill monitoring who want to get an overview of the problem and how to address it, and those already working in the field who want to understand the scope of the work being accomplished. Consequently, the current paper contributes both to academic RS research and to practical applications.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.006
Bibliometrics0.0120.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations69
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGIScience & Remote SensingSame topicOil Spill Detection and MitigationFrench-language works237,207