MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W371451046

Soil moisture retrieval using L-band time-series SAR data from the SMAPVEX12 experiment

2014· article· en· W371451046 on OpenAlexaffabout
Seung Bum Kim, Huan Huang, Leung Tsang, Thomas J. Jackson, Heather McNairn, Jakob van Zyl

Bibliographic record

VenueEUSAR 2014; 10th European Conference on Synthetic Aperture Radar; Proceedings of · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynthetic aperture radarRemote sensingWater contentEnvironmental scienceRadarVegetation (pathology)Inversion (geology)MoistureSoil scienceMeteorologyGeologyGeographyComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The algorithms for retrieving soil moisture contents within the top 5 cm of the soil using the L-band multipolarized radar data from the future Soil Moisture Active and Passive (SMAP) mission were applied to the data sets obtained by the recent aircraft field campaign in Winnipeg Canada in 2012 (SMAPVEX12), and the algorithm performance was evaluated. Two algorithms are: the time-series inversion of radar scattering forward models data-cubes and the change detection method. The SMAPVEX12 data sets include airborne synthetic aperture radar (SAR) data and ground-based measurements of soil and vegetation. These data were collected over fields with diverse crops and a wide range of moisture and vegetation conditions. In general, volumetric soil moisture and backscattering coefficients showed a positive relationship and the vegetation effects were significant for corn and beans. Assessed over all available fields of corn, beans, pasture, and wheat, the datacube time-series inversion resulted in a retrieval rmse of 0.050 to 0.090 cm3/cm3, and correlations of 0.5 to 0.9. Compared with the change detection approach, the data-cube inversion performed better in the presence of significant vegetation growth.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.206 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEUSAR 2014; 10th European Conference on Synthetic Aperture Radar; Proceedings ofSame topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207