MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6910223884 · doi:10.3929/ethz-b-000735852

Observing Seasonal Variabilities of a Permafrost Landscape With PolSAR, InSAR and Pol-InSAR

2025· other· en· W6910223884 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueRepository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermafrostSynthetic aperture radarTundraInterferometric synthetic aperture radarVegetation (pathology)RadarSpace-based radarRadar imaging

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synthetic aperture radar (SAR) remote sensing is an established approach for observing Earth processes. The combination of different types of SAR acquisitions in polarimetric, interferometric, and polarimetric-interferometric frameworks is well studied for retrieving parameters of certain landscape features, such as forests and glaciers. These frameworks have only been rarely applied to permafrost regions, characterized by particular dielectric and structural properties, in particular frozen ground. Here, we investigate the effect of permafrost characteristics on the different SAR imaging modes. This study performs an analysis of the SAR data retrieved during an airborne campaign conducted by the German Aerospace Center (DLR) in the Canadian low Arctic. Established polarimetric SAR, SAR interferometry, and polarimetric SAR interferometry techniques are applied on the region of interest. For each of these techniques, results are analyzed in several dimensions. Winter and summer observables are compared, the influence of vegetation type is assessed, and differences between results obtained at different radar frequencies are shown. This study leads the path toward the retrieval of soil and vegetation parameters in permafrost tundra environments using multimodal SAR techniques.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.110
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.227 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRepository for Publications and Research Data (ETH Zurich)Same topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207