MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095581984

Evaluation of the TanDEM-X Digital Elevation Model by PPP GPS- Analysis and Intermediate Results-

2015· article· en· W7095581984 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital elevation modelGlobal Positioning SystemSatelliteElevation (ballistics)Shuttle Radar Topography MissionRadarDifferential GPS
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From mission TerraSAR-X add-on for Digital Elevation Measurements (TanDEM-X) of the German Space Agency (DLR) a global digital elevation model (DEM) will be derived using satellite SAR interferometry. Two radar satellites (TerraSAR-X and Tandem-X) are going to map the earth in such a resolution and accuracy that was not possible in any earlier missions: the aim is an absolute height error of 10m or a relative height error of 2m respectively for 90 % of the data. One method to evaluate the accuracy is the use of kinematic Precise Point Positioning (PPP) GPS measurements. The required accuracy is around 0.5 m. The evaluation of the tracks is carried out using the software GIPSY 5.0 of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), USA, as well as using the online service of the Natural Resources of Canada named CSRS-PPP. Both results are combined, thus defining the final solution. After the presentation of results for the first track from Munich, Germany, to Sao Martinho, Portugal in 2009, the intermediate results of five tracks located in Europe, China and South America are described and analyzed in this paper. The final average RMS is calculated to 0.49m and the availability rate is determined to 61%. These values justify the characteristics of the first drive and fulfill the requirements. A second focus of the paper is the analysis of the

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSynthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) Applications and TechniquesFrench-language works237,207