Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Gladys Finyom

dblp:91/8986 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2010
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Image and video processing · 100%
Interdisciplinary, comprehensive, and emerging computing
1 paper
Environmental and earth informatics · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Image and video processing › image segmentation
active contour
0.112010
Automated Polar Ice Thickness Estimation From Radar Imagery · IEEE Trans. Image Process. 2010
Image and video processing › image segmentation
edge-based segmentation
0.112010
Automated Polar Ice Thickness Estimation From Radar Imagery · IEEE Trans. Image Process. 2010
Image and video processing
image segmentation
0.112010
Automated Polar Ice Thickness Estimation From Radar Imagery · IEEE Trans. Image Process. 2010
Environmental and earth informatics
remote sensing
0.012010
Automated Polar Ice Thickness Estimation From Radar Imagery · IEEE Trans. Image Process. 2010

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

interpolation · 0.2edge detection · 0.2active contours · 0.1active contour · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2010 Automated Polar ice thickness estimation from radar imagery
abstract
This work focuses on automating the task of estimating Polar ice thickness from airborne radar data acquired over Greenland and Antarctica. This process involves the identification and accurate selection of the ice sheet's surface location and interface between the ice sheet and the underlying bedrock for each measurement. Identifying the surface and bedrock locations in the radar imagery enables the computation of ice sheet thickness, which is important for the study of ice sheets, their volume, and how they may contribute to global climate change. The time-consuming manual approach requires sparse hand-selection of surface and bedrock interfaces by several human experts, and interpolating between the selections to save time.
MyAsia Reid, Christopher M. Gifford, Michael Jefferson, Eric L. Akers, Gladys Finyom, Arvin Agah
IGARSS5
2010 Automated Polar Ice Thickness Estimation From Radar Imagery
abstract
This paper focuses on automating the task of estimating Polar ice thickness from airborne radar data acquired over Greenland and Antarctica. This process involves the identification and accurate selection of the ice sheet's surface location and interface between the ice sheet and the underlying bedrock for each measurement. Identifying the surface and bedrock locations in the radar imagery enables the computation of ice sheet thickness, which is important for the study of ice sheets, their volume, and how they may contribute to global climate change. The time-consuming manual approach requires sparse hand-selection of surface and bedrock interfaces by several human experts, and interpolating between the selections to save time. Two primary methods have been studied in this paper, namely, edge-based and active contour. Results are evaluated and presented using the metrics of time requirements and accuracy. Automated ice thickness estimation results from 2006 and 2007 Greenland field campaigns illustrate that the edge-based approach offers faster processing (seconds compared to minutes), but suffers from a lack of continuity and smoothness aspects that active contours provide. The active contour approach is more accurate when compared to ground truth selections provided by human experts, and has proven to be more robust to image artifacts. It is shown that both techniques offer advantages which could be integrated to yield a more effective system.
Christopher M. Gifford, Gladys Finyom, Michael Jefferson, MyAsia Reid, Eric L. Akers, Arvin Agah
IEEE Trans. Image Process.2