MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2563084455 · doi:10.2112/si76-004

Optimization of Data Collection and Refinement of Post-processing Techniques for Maritime Canada's First Shallow Water Topographic-bathymetric Lidar Survey

2016· article· en· W2563084455 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Coastal Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Community College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBathymetryLidarTurbidityWaves and shallow waterRemote sensingGeologyOceanographyWind speedHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Webster, T.; McGuigan, K.; Crowell, N.; Collins, K., and MacDonald, C., 2016. Optimization of data collection and refinement of post-processing techniques for Maritime Canada's first shallow water topographic-bathymetric lidar survey. In: Brock, J.C.; Gesch, D.B.; Parrish, C.E.; Rogers, J.N., and Wright, C.W. (eds.), Advances in Topobathymetric Mapping, Models, and Applications. Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue, No. 76, pp. 31–43. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208.An airborne topographic-bathymetric lidar survey was conducted for five coastal study sites in Maritime Canada in fall 2014 using the shallow water Leica AHAB Chiroptera II sensor. The sensor utilizes near-infrared (NIR) and green lasers to map topography, water surface, and bathymetry, and is equipped with a 60 MPIX camera, which results in 5-cm resolution color and NIR orthophotos. Depth penetration of the lidar sensor is limited by water clarity, and because the coastal zone is vulnerable to reduced water clarity/increased turbidity due to fine-grained sediment suspended by wind-induced waves, several techniques were employed to obtain maximum depth penetration of the sensor. These included monitoring wind speed, direction, and water clarity at study locations, surveying a narrow pass of the study area to assess depth penetration, and quickly adapting to changing weather conditions by altering course to an area where water clarity was less affected by wind-induced turbidity. These techniques enabled 90% depth penetration at all five of the shallow embayments surveyed and up to 6 m depth penetration in the exposed coastal region. Synchronous ground truth surveys were conducted to measure water depth and clarity and seabed cover during the surveys. GPS checkpoints on land indicated that the topographic lidar had an accuracy of better than 10 cm RMSE in the vertical. The amplitude of the green laser bathymetric returns provides information on bottom type and can be useful for generating maps of vegetation distribution. However, these data are not automatically compensated for water depth attenuation and signal loss in post-processing, which results in difficulties in interpreting the amplitude imagery derived from the green laser. An empirical approach to generating a depth-normalized amplitude image which is merged with elevation derivatives to produce a 2-m resolution map product that is easily interpreted by end users is presented. An eelgrass distribution model was derived from the bathymetric elevation parameters with 80% producer's accuracy.

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)0.003
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 score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.912

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.269 · 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