MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982719377 · doi:10.1080/01431161.2015.1029099

A new method to generate a high-resolution global distribution map of lake chlorophyll

2015· article· en· W1982719377 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Sayers, Amanda G. Grimm, Robert A. Shuchman, Andrew M. Deines, David B. Bunnell, Zachary B. Raymer, Mark W. Rogers, Whitney M. Woelmer, David H. Bennion, Colin Brooks, M. A. Whitley, David M. Warner, Justin G. Mychek‐Londer

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
FundersEuropean Space AgencyMichigan Technological UniversityU.S. Geological SurveyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceChlorophyll aRemote sensingSatelliteSatellite imageryRange (aeronautics)Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A new method was developed, evaluated, and applied to generate a global dataset of growing-season chlorophyll-a (chl) concentrations in 2011 for freshwater lakes. Chl observations from freshwater lakes are valuable for estimating lake productivity as well as assessing the role that these lakes play in carbon budgets. The standard 4 km NASA OceanColor L3 chlorophyll concentration products generated from MODIS and MERIS sensor data are not sufficiently representative of global chl values because these can only resolve larger lakes, which generally have lower chl concentrations than lakes of smaller surface area. Our new methodology utilizes the 300 m-resolution MERIS full-resolution full-swath (FRS) global dataset as input and does not rely on the land mask used to generate standard NASA products, which masks many lakes that are otherwise resolvable in MERIS imagery. The new method produced chl concentration values for 78,938 and 1,074 lakes in the northern and southern hemispheres, respectively. The mean chl for lakes visible in the MERIS composite was 19.2 ± 19.2, the median was 13.3, and the interquartile range was 3.90–28.6 mg m−3. The accuracy of the MERIS-derived values was assessed by comparison with temporally near-coincident and globally distributed in situ measurements from the literature (n = 185, RMSE = 9.39, R2 = 0.72). This represents the first global-scale dataset of satellite-derived chl estimates for medium to large lakes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations54
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Remote SensingSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207