MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Retrieving Tropical Cyclone Wind Speed with Random Forest Using RADARSAT and Sentinel-1A/B SAR Images

2024· article· en· W4402260761 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiaomin Li, Xu Han, Jingsong Yang, Jinfei Wang, Guoqi Han, Gang Zheng, Lizhang Zhou, Peng Chen, Lei Ren, Yiqi Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicOcean Waves and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersState Key Laboratory of Satellite Ocean Environment DynamicsNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaMinistry of Natural Resources
KeywordsTropical cycloneWind speedSynthetic aperture radarEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingMeteorologyRandom forestCyclone (programming language)ClimatologyGeologyGeographyComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study proposes a deep learning (DL) approach for retrieving high wind speeds during tropical cyclones using a random forest algorithm applied to RADARSAT and Sentinel-1A/B Synthetic Aperture radar (SAR) images. The effectiveness of the proposed DL-based model is then demonstrated through a comprehensive validation of the results. Statistical analysis of the results showed that the proposed method performs well, with a low root-mean-square error, mean bias, and high correlation coefficient when compared to SFMR (Stepped-Frequency Microwave Radiometer) winds. The reconstructed wind speeds and inner-core structures were found to be in good agreement with surface wind measurements from SFMR. These findings could have significant implications for improving our understanding and prediction of tropical cyclone dynamics, as well as for operational forecasting and disaster management.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOcean Waves and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207