MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2145821924 · doi:10.1109/oceans.1999.800170

Mapping nearshore and intertidal marine habitats with remote sensing and GPS: the importance of spatial and temporal scales

2003· article· en· W2145821924 on OpenAlexaff
Colin D. Levings, M.S. North, G. E. Piercey, Glen Jamieson, Brian D. Smiley

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransectIntertidal zoneHabitatRemote sensingGlobal Positioning SystemAerial surveyGround truthSeagrassEnvironmental scienceGeographyGeoreferenceOceanographyPhysical geographyGeologyEcologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present results and experience of mapping and assessment of algae and seagrass beds in British Columbia using air photo interpretation, compact airborne spectrographic imager, ground surveys using a high precision GPS, and conventional survey techniques. Low-level colour air photography was found to be an effective and accurate methodology, but only when accompanied by thorough ground-truthing. Ground-truthing was conducted by foot surveys at low tide or by observations from a boat or hovercraft at high water. Results from CASI were more problematic, especially to determine the boundaries of similar plant or algae habitats, but could be improved with more spectral signature data of specific plant species as well as consideration of the seasonal change of those spectra. Mapping of algae beds using a GPS at 1:500 scale (est.) was tested by foot surveys to delineate the boundary of the habitat or by a grid system where the positions of vertical and horizontal transects were georeferenced using the instrument. The latter method was accurate and relatively efficient and enabled quick mapping of the habitat units into a GIS. There are very few data on the temporal change of the extent and position of specific habitats in our region. However by reviewing data in a land tenure data base obtained with conventional survey techniques (e.g. transits) we determined that the number of hectares of nearshore habitat used for industrial purposes (log storage) has declined over the past decade in the Strait of Georgia. As an indicator of trends in habitat use over the entire shoreline of the Strait, these data were sufficient. In an effort to increase the role of the public in habitat monitoring over time, we developed and tested methods for mapping by citizens. The methods in the "Shorekeeper's Guide" give citizens options for using conventional survey and/or GPS methods for mapping beaches in coastal communities. Scales for this work are about 1:500.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.586
Threshold uncertainty score0.833

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.191
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations4
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine and coastal plant biology→French-language works237,207→