Automated ocean front feature mapping using Sentinel-1 with examples from the Gulf Stream
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study assessed the ability of Sentinel-1 radial velocity (RVL) products to mark the position of ocean current front features, using the Gulf Stream (GS) as a case study. RVL-derived front features were compared to fronts derived from Multi-scale Ultra-high Resolution Sea Surface Temperature Analysis (MURSST) data. A ridge filter was used to find fronts in both the Sea Surface Temperature (SST) and RVL data, and the similarity between each pair of fronts was measured using the discrete Hausdorff Distance (HD) and Mean Hausdorff Distance (MHD). Front features were correctly identified in concurrent SST and RVL data pairs in 65% of cases. The automatic front extraction sometimes failed by misclassifying an eddy or similar ocean feature as the ocean current in either the RVL or SST image, and sometimes failed to extract the entire length of the front visible within the image. SST and RVL fronts were classified manually to determine the success rate of the automatic front extraction, and to exclude front extraction errors from further analysis. The results demonstrated that RVL products were effective at determining the location of ocean fronts where the angle between the front’s normal vector and the sensor’s azimuthal heading is less than ~ 40°. A mean HD of 25.5 km and a mean MHD of 10.8 km was calculated for all front pairs in the study area.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".