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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 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
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