MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2029696640 · doi:10.1080/01431160512331314100

Prioritizing ocean colour channels by neural network input reflectance perturbation

2005· article· en· W2029696640 on OpenAlexaff
Steffen Dransfeld, A.R.L. Tatnall, I. S. Robinson, Curtis D. Mobley

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Remote Sensing · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsQuébec Metro High Tech Park (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReflectivityRemote sensingArtificial neural networkRadiative transferEnvironmental scienceSpectral lineMultilayer perceptronAtmospheric correctionAtmospheric radiative transfer codesChlorophyll aBiological systemComputer scienceGeologyChemistryOpticsPhysicsArtificial intelligenceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The radiative transfer model Hydrolight was used to produce 18 000 artificial reflectance spectra representing case 1 and case 2 water conditions. Remote sensing reflectances were generated at the MERIS wavebands 412, 442, 490, 510, 560, 620, 665 and 682 nm from randomly generated triplet combinations of chlorophyll a, non‐chlorophyllous particles and coloured dissolved organic matter concentrations. These spectra were used to train multilayer perceptron neural network algorithms to perform the inversion from input reflectances to these three optically active substances. A method is proposed that establishes the neural network output error sensitivity towards changes in the individual input reflectance channels. From the output error produced for each reflectance change, a hypothesis about the importance of each band can be made. Results suggest a strong weight associated to the 620 nm band for the estimation of all three substances.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.972
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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