A Wetness Index Using Terrain-Corrected Surface Temperature and Normalized Difference Vegetation Index Derived from Standard MODIS Products: An Evaluation of Its Use in a Humid Forest-Dominated Region of Eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we develop a method to estimate land-surface water content in amostly forest-dominated (humid) and topographically-varied region of eastern Canada. Theapproach is centered on a temperature-vegetation wetness index (TVWI) that uses standard 8-day MODIS-based image composites of land surface temperature (TS) and surface reflectanceas primary input. In an attempt to improve estimates of TVWI in high elevation areas, terrain-induced variations in TS are removed by applying grid, digital elevation model-basedcalculations of vertical atmospheric pressure to calculations of surface potential temperature(θS). Here, θS corrects TS to the temperature value to what it would be at mean sea level (i.e.,~101.3 kPa) in a neutral atmosphere. The vegetation component of the TVWI uses 8-daycomposites of surface reflectance in the calculation of normalized difference vegetation index(NDVI) values. TVWI and corresponding wet and dry edges are based on an interpretation ofscatterplots generated by plotting θS as a function of NDVI. A comparison of spatially-averaged field measurements of volumetric soil water content (VSWC) and TVWI for the 2003-2005 period revealed that variation with time to both was similar in magnitudes. Growing season, point mean measurements of VSWC and TVWI were 31.0% and 28.8% for 2003, 28.6% and 29.4% for 2004, and 40.0% and 38.4% for 2005, respectively. An evaluation of the long-term spatial distribution of land-surface wetness generated with the new θS-NDVI function and a process-based model of soil water content showed a strong relationship (i.e., r2 = 95.7%).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".