MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4290714017 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2022.3196012

Statistical Analysis of CyGNSS Speckle and Its Applications to Surface Water Mapping

2022· article· en· W4290714017 on OpenAlexaff
Baojian Liu, Wei Wan, Guoqiang Tang, Huan Li, Zhizhou Guo, X. Chen, Yang Hong

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsSpeckle patternRemote sensingComputer scienceStatistical analysisStatisticsArtificial intelligenceGeologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Global Navigation Satellite System reflectometry (GNSS-R) technique has demonstrated its potential for terrestrial applications. Over inland water bodies, the dominance of coherent components in GNSS-R has been widely recognized. Nevertheless, little attention is given to GNSS-R speckle, which is inherent to coherent imaging systems. In this study, taking the multiplicative speckle into account, we regard GNSS-R coherent scattering as a statistical distribution. First, the expression of the statistical distribution is identified and parameterized using observations from the Cyclone Global Navigation Satellite System (CyGNSS). The results suggest that the power tends to obey a three-degrees-of-freedom distribution model. Second, the multilook statistics of CyGNSS, such as the mean value and the coefficient of variation (CV), are analyzed on different spatial–temporal scales. Finally, we realize surface water mapping using multilook statistics. Comparison with the state-of-the-art algorithms shows that the proposed method can effectively improve the goodness of water mapping, with higher overall accuracies (~0.97) and F1 scores (~0.60). This study provides new insights into future GNSS-R land observations.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.602

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207