Skip to content

Conversation

@abradley60
Copy link
Collaborator

  • Allow the dem_type to be a single value or list of preferences. The code will then iterate through the preferences and if the preferred option has dem data it will be used. For example, preferencing the REMA_32 DEM for the Antarctic region
  • Specifying backscatter_covention at the top level. This enables gamma0, sigma0 and beta0 data to be created from the top
  • Fixing the conda envrionment that started asking for acceptance of terms of conditions (microconda -> miniforge)
  • Cleaning up some logic that has been changed in the RTC project itself. For example, defining the organisation as GA.

Copy link
Collaborator

@caitlinadams caitlinadams left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good, thanks Alex! I've added a few comments/questions/suggestions for you to have a look at

"_mask.tif",
".png",
],
"sigma0": [
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we want to do anything at this time to signify whether we're producing the dem- or ellipsoid-version of sigma0? (sorry, this one still confuses me, so I'm not even 100% clear on which one is produced by default)

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Decision to leave as is and make the change later

"_HV_gamma0.tif": "HV polarised gamma0 linear backscatter",
"_VV_gamma0.tif": "VV polarised gamma0 linear backscatter",
"_VH_gamma0.tif": "VH polarised gamma0 linear backscatter",
"_HH_sigma0.tif": "HH polarised sigma0 linear backscatter",
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should the description say whether it's dem vs ellipsoid sigma0?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah I think I will add to the description here and add a logger.warning statement in the workfow to let the user know the sigma0 data is dem referenced, and ellipsoid referenced should be made using the incidence angle. Unfortunately it's not very clean... what do you think?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Decision to leave as is and make the change later

".png": pystac.media_type.MediaType.PNG,
}

UPDATED_METADATA_PARAMETERS = {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Confirming that this is no longer required because we're using the GA-fork version of the code?

backscatter_convention=gamma0 # gamma0, sigma0 or beta0
s3_bucket="deant-data-public-dev"
s3_project_folder="ga_s1"
collection="s1_rtc_c1"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Does this now need to be changed to "collection_number"? Or have you not made that change just yet?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

collection_number logic will come in the next PR, just didn't want to make too many changes at once for y'all to review

Copy link
Collaborator

@geoscience-aman geoscience-aman left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good, thanks Alex!

My only feedback is that it might be worth adding a statement to the documentation of how one should generate ellipsoid-referenced $\sigma_0$ with the new backscatter_convention flag.

@abradley60 abradley60 merged commit 22f5529 into main Jul 21, 2025
2 checks passed
@abradley60 abradley60 deleted the upgrade/dem-logic branch August 22, 2025 05:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants