Radar Scattering Features Under High Wind Conditions From Spaceborne Quad-Polarization SAR Observations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the impact of wave breaking (WB) and Bragg scattering on the normalized radar cross section (NRCS) to reveal radar scattering features during high wind conditions. This is conducted by decomposing C-band quasi-synchronous wide-swath quad-polarization synthetic aperture radar (SAR) observations acquired from the RADARSAT Constellation Mission (RCM) and RADARSAT-2 (RS-2). The analysis results clearly demonstrate that the polarization difference (PD) associated with Bragg scattering saturates at high wind speeds, while still maintaining azimuthal modulation. Notably, the radar returns from breaking waves at cross-polarization (HV or VH) exhibit higher sensitivity to wind speeds but lower sensitivity to wind direction, compared to co-polarization (HH or VV). Moreover, our analyses show that WB contributes 40%, 80%, and 90% of VV-, HH-, and HV-polarized NRCS, respectively. This study highlights the unique capabilities provided by collocated RCM and RS-2 observations for investigating radar scattering features under high wind conditions. Results of this study can be further used to develop empirical models for estimating co- and cross-polarization radar backscatters induced by WB under high wind speeds.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".