MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404687921 · doi:10.1109/lgrs.2024.3505216

Gap Filling for ISMN Time Series Using CYGNSS Data

2024· article· en· W4404687921 on OpenAlexaff
Qingyun Yan, Mintao Hu, Shuanggen Jin, Weimin Huang

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicInertial Sensor and Navigation
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsSeries (stratigraphy)Computer scienceTime seriesMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study introduces a method for filling the data gaps in the International Soil Moisture Network (ISMN) by soil moisture (SM) estimated using data from the Cyclone Global Navigation Satellite System (CYGNSS). The estimation process leverages the random forest (RF) algorithm, incorporating CYGNSS-derived products along with soil and surface parameters as input features. This research was conducted based on the daily SM data from the ISMN for the entire years of 2019 and 2020, which served as training and test datasets. Comparison experiments were performed to highlight the limitations of existing methods and SM products for gap filling in ISMN SM data. Subsequently, the optimal retrieval model was deployed to estimate SM for the duration of the study, thereby filling the gaps within the ISMN dataset. The SM results after gap filling showed strong consistency with measured SM, achieving an R-squared (<inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$R^{2}$ </tex-math></inline-formula>) of 0.7930 and a root-mean-square error (RMSE) of 0.0492 cm3/cm3. These results indicate that CYGNSS-based SM inversion is a promising approach to enhance the completeness of the ISMN dataset.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.445

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.260
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing LettersSame topicInertial Sensor and NavigationFrench-language works237,207