MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2065157590 · doi:10.5589/m11-004

Chi-square spectral fitting for concentration retrieval, automatic local calibration, quality control, and water type detection

2010· article· en· W2065157590 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Annelies Hommersom, Steef Peters, H.J. van der Woerd, M.A. Eleveld, J. de Boer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKoninklijk Nederlands Instituut voor Onderzoek der ZeeNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsColored dissolved organic matterCalibrationEnvironmental scienceEstuaryRemote sensingChlorophyll aMean squared errorWater qualityRoot mean squareParticulatesIn situAtmospheric correctionReflectivityMathematicsChemistryGeographyPhysicsStatisticsGeologyEcologyOpticsMeteorologyPhytoplanktonOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the inverse bio-optical model HYDROPT was calibrated with regional specific inherent optical properties (SIOPs) and various local SIOPs to examine the effect of these calibrations on the retrievals. The study area, the Wadden Sea, is an estuary and tidal flat area with very high concentrations of chlorophyll a (Chl a), suspended particulate matter (SPM), and coloured dissolved organic matter (CDOM). HYDROPT could derive concentrations of Chl a, SPM, and CDOM with a reasonable degree of accuracy when in situ above-water reflectances were used as input (root mean squared error of 0.19–0.52 mg·m−3 for Chl a, 0.28–0.46 mg·m−3 for SPM, and 0.20–0.34 m−1 for aCDOM). However, quality control showed that 70% of the in situ input reflectance spectra were ambiguous; these spectra could be modelled with various sets of SIOPs. Therefore, automatic local calibration based on the spectral fit (χ2) value of the fitting procedure did not necessarily lead to the best results; this was expected to be an advantage of χ2 fitting. When MERIS data were used as input, the concentration maps showed distributions according to the expectations, although tidal flats and nearby land affected the results at the locations that matched with in situ stations. The water types (water with similar SIOPs) that could be detected based on MERIS data were new in this study.

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)0.001
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 score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.208
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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