Remote sensing of sediment characteristics by optimized echo-envelope matching

Sternlicht, Daniel D.; Moustier, Christian P. de

doi:10.1121/1.1608019

Cited by 51 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[13][14][15] These approaches mainly differ in the complexity of the sound propagation and sediment interaction accounted for.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…13, an approach is proposed that employs a sophisticated model for predicting the SBES echo envelope. This is further described in Ref.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For maximizing the agreement between modeled and measured echoes, a combination of different optimization techniques is employed in Ref. 13. Three sediment parameters are searched for, being the sediment mean grain size, the surface roughness, expressed as the spectral strength, and the volume scattering parameter.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Model-based sediment classification using single-beam echosounder signals

Snellen

Siemes

Simons

2011

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acoustic remote sensing techniques for mapping sediment properties are of interest due to their low costs and high coverage. Model-based approaches directly couple the acoustic signals to sediment properties. Despite the limited coverage of the single-beam echosounder (SBES), it is widely used. Having available model-based SBES classification tools, therefore, is important. Here, two modelbased approaches of different complexity are compared to investigate their practical applicability. The first approach is based on matching the echo envelope. It maximally exploits the information available in the signal but requires complex modeling and optimization. To minimize computational costs, the efficient differential evolution method is used. The second approach reduces the information of the signal to energy only and directly relates this to the reflection coefficient to obtain quantitative information about the sediment parameters. The first approach provides information over a variety of sediment types. In addition to sediment mean grain size, it also provides estimates for the spectral strength and volume scattering parameter. The need to account for all three parameters is demonstrated, justifying computational expenses. In the second approach, the lack of information on these parameters and the limited SBES beamwidth are demonstrated to hamper the conversion of echo energy to reflection coefficient.

show abstract

“…[13][14][15] These approaches mainly differ in the complexity of the sound propagation and sediment interaction accounted for.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…13, an approach is proposed that employs a sophisticated model for predicting the SBES echo envelope. This is further described in Ref.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Model-based sediment classification using single-beam echosounder signals

Snellen

Siemes

Simons

2011

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the calculation of a correct set of geoacoustic parameters gets convoluted by the large number of good fits existing in the multidimensional search space. Accordingly, it is possible to obtain convincing model-data fits in the search space that do not necessarily correspond to the correct set of geoacoustic parameters (Sternlicht and de Moustier, 2003b). Moreover, the physics-based models are valid only for a certain range of frequencies and sediment types (AmiriSimkooei et al, 2011), such that the direct inversion of an acoustic signal is unlikely without setting the limits of geoacoustic parameters for a known seabed sediment.…”

Section: Comparison With Inversion Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stochastic formalism-based seafloor feature discrimination using multifractality of time-dependent acoustic backscatter

Haris

Chakraborty

2014

Nonlin. Processes Geophys.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Dual-frequency echo-envelope data acquired using the normal-incidence single-beam echosounder system (SBES) have been examined to study its scale invariant properties. The scaling and multifractality of the SBES echo envelopes (at 33 and 210 kHz) were validated by applying a stochastic-based multifractal analysis technique. The analyses carried out substantiate the hierarchy of multiplicative cascade dynamics in the echo envelopes, demonstrating a first-order multifractal phase transition. The resulting scale invariant parameters (α, C 1 , and H ) establish gainful information that can facilitate distinctive delineation of the sediment provinces in the central part of the western continental shelf of India. The universal multifractal parameters among the coarse and fine sediments exhibit subtle difference in α and H , whereas the codimension parameter C 1 representing the sparseness of the data varies. The C 1 values are well clustered at both the acoustic frequencies, demarcating the coarse and fine sediment provinces. Statistically significant correlations are noticeable between the computed C 1 values and the ground truth sediment information. The variations in the multifractal parameters and their behavior with respect to the ground truth sediment information are in good corroboration with the previously estimated sediment geoacoustic inversion results obtained at the same locations.

show abstract

“…A large part of the research on acoustic means for sediment classification has focused on systems that today are widely available, such as multibeam echosounders (MBESs), e.g., [2]- [4]; single-beam echosounders (SBESs), e.g., [5]- [7]; and sidescan sonars (SSSs), e.g., [8]. The advantage of these systems is that they are in use already, and therefore no additional hardware is required.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%