MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2071405080 · doi:10.4296/cwrj267

A Comparison of Data Sources for Manual and Automated Hydrographical Network Delineation

2004· article· en· W2071405080 on OpenAlex
Jonathan K Melville, Lawrence W. Martz

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Water Resources Journal / Revue canadienne des ressources hydriques · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater and Watershed Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDigital elevation modelComputer scienceSTREAMSTributaryElevation (ballistics)Remote sensingData miningCartographyGeographyComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of hydrological stream networks derived from two digital elevation models (DEM) and two remote sensing images for a tributary of the Frenchman River in southwest Saskatchewan. This project also provides practical insight into the use of Indian Remote Sensing (IRS) Satellite imaging for hydrological network delineation. IRS images and orthophotographs were used for manual network delineation. Canadian Digital Elevation Data (CDED) and a digital elevation model (DEM) constructed from point and line elevation information from the orthophotographs were used for automated network delineation in program TOPAZ (TOpographic PArameteriZation). Each delineated network was compared with the same National Topographic Series (NTS) blue-line network, as it was assumed the NTS network was the most accurate available representation of the actual drainage network. The networks were compared by visual overlay, Kappa Index of Agreement (KIA) and network statistics such as bifurcation and stream length ratios. The IRS, orthophotograph, and CDED networks were suitable data sources for network delineation, whereas the ortho DEM was not. The major differences between the networks were in the first order streams with consequent effects on higher order streams. First order streams are difficult to delineate in a consistent and accurate manner in a digital environment because of the nature of data sources and differences in the computation processes. As a result, it is concluded that field surveys should be considered in conjunction with digital manipulation for the accurate classification of first order streams. Cette tude a t conduite pour valuer l'exactitude des rseaux hydrologiques drivs a partir de deux modles numriques d'altitude (DEM) et de deux images de tldtection pour un tributaire de la rivire Frenchman dans une rgion au sud-ouest de la Saskatchewan. Ce projet fournira galement de l'information pratique en ce qui concern l'utilisation du Indian Remote Sensing Satellite (IRS) pour la dlination hydrologique de rseau. Des images et les orthophotographs de IRS ont t employs pour la dlination de rseau manuel. Les donnes canadiennes d'altitude de Numrique (CDED) et un modle numrique d'altitude (DEM) construit a partir d'information d'altitude de point et de ligne des orthophotographs ont t employs pour la dlination automatise de rseau dans le programme TOPAZ (paramtrisation topographique). Chaque rseau trac a t compar au mme rseau topographique national ligne bleue de la srie (NTS), car le rseau de NTS tait la reprsentation disponible la plus prcise du rseau rel. Les rseaux ont t compars par le recouvrement visuel, l'index de Kappa (KIA), et les statistiques de rseau telles que des rapports de longueur et bifurcation des jets. Le IRS, l'orthophotograph, et les rseaux de CDED taient convenable comme source d'information pour la dlination de rseau, tandis que le DEM ortho- n'tait pas. Les diffrences principales entre les rseaux taient dans les premiers jets d'ordre et les effets de consquent sur des jets d'ordre plus suprieur. Il est difficile de tracer les premiers jets d'ordre d'une faon consistante et prcise dans l'environnement numrique en raison de la diffrente source d'information et de variation entre logiciels utiliss lors du processus de calcul. En consquence, on conclut que des enqutes de champ devraient tre considres en mme temps que la manipulation numrique pour la classification prcise des premiers jets d'ordre.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.244 · 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