MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2796554867 · doi:10.22215/etd/2016-11581

Development of methods to map and monitor peatland ecosystems and hydrologic conditions using Radarsat-2 Synthetic Aperture Radar

2016· dissertation· en· W2796554867 on OpenAlexafffund
Koreen Millard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaParks Canada
KeywordsPeatEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarWater contentRandom forestVegetation (pathology)Hydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceGeologyGeographyComputer scienceMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peatland ecosystems exhibit a wide range of biophysical conditions and Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) remote sensing provides a method to collect information about these conditions over large areas.The ability to extract useful hydrologic and vegetation information across peatlands is currently limited due to complex interactions of spatially and temporally-variable conditions on the SAR response.The overarching purpose of this thesis was to advance our understanding of SAR backscatter response to peatland hydrology and vegetation and to develop new approaches for remote mapping and monitoring of peatland environments with SAR.Specifically, this thesis aimed to 1) improve methods for peatland ecosystem mapping and classification accuracy assessment with a Random Forest classifier;and 2) develop methods for surface soil moisture and water table depth retrieval in peatlands using SAR remote sensing data.At Alfred Bog, a peatland in eastern Ontario, Canada, active remote sensing data (SAR and Light Detection and Ranging) were used for these purposes.A Random Forest classification workflow was developed, resulting in an improved peatland ecosystem mapping technique.Recommendations for appropriate training data sample selection with this classifier were also developed.This workflow enabled the creation of a sitewide peatland ecosystem map, which was used to better understand the SAR response to hydrological and vegetation conditions within the different peatland ecosystem classes.For the retrieval of surface hydrologic information, groups of highly correlated variables were identified from a large number of SAR parameters iii (including SAR intensity, polarimetric decomposition and discriminator variables) and a subset of these were compared with trends in soil moisture, water table and vegetation spatial variability and change over time.The Freeman-Durden Power due to Rough Surface parameter was found to be positively correlated with soil moisture, while the Touzi AlphaS1 parameter was found to be negatively correlated with water table depth from the surface.Various polarimetric parameters were used to build statistical models of soil moisture and, in some cases, CART-models resulted in high explained variance but independent validation indicated that these models were over-fit.These results are important, as many examples were found in the literature where, through statistical models, SAR was reported to be a strong predictor of soil moisture but models were not properly validated.To determine if models could predict soil moisture from SAR at times when no field measured data existed, linear mixed effects models were built that accounted for the temporal autocorrelation due to the repeated measures design of field data.While some models resulted in high explained variance, most of the explained variance was attributed to the variability between peatland classes and/or the specific date that the image was acquired, rather than the SAR data itself.These models also presented challenges in independent validation.Overall, this thesis points to some fundamental limitations on our ability to accurately monitor peatland hydrology with SAR due to the complexity of the scattering response where complex surface conditions exist.It highlights a need for extensive field monitoring campaigns and testing to further refine approaches for remote hydrologic monitoring in natural environments.iv Acknowledgements First, I would like to thank my supervisor, Murray Richardson, for his support and guidance over the past few years.Thank you for taking me on as a student, encouraging me to gain experience a wide variety of environments and technologies, passing on so many important skills and for being available to talk issues and questions through throughout this entire process.I would also like to thank my committee members (Doug King and Scott Mitchell) for providing valuable comments and guidance throughout the various stages of this research.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology→French-language works237,207→