MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885606789 · doi:10.3390/ijgi7080306

Satellite-Derived Bathymetry for Improving Canadian Hydrographic Service Charts

2018· article· en· W2885606789 on OpenAlexafffundabout
René Chénier, Marc-André Faucher, Ryan Ahola

Bibliographic record

VenueISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsCanadian Hydrographic Service
FundersCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsHydrographic surveyBathymetryHydrographyRemote sensingSatelliteService (business)Environmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementGeographyCartographyBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Approximately 1000 Canadian Hydrographic Service (CHS) charts cover Canada’s oceans and navigable waters. Many charts use information collected with techniques that predate the more advanced technologies available to Hydrographic Offices (HOs) today. Furthermore, gaps in survey data, particularly in the Canadian Arctic where only 6% of waters are surveyed to modern standards, are also problematic. Through a Canadian Space Agency (CSA) Government Related Initiatives Program (GRIP) project, CHS is exploring remote sensing techniques to assist with the improvement of Canadian navigational charts. Projects exploring optical/Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) shoreline extraction and change detection, as well as optical Satellite-Derived Bathymetry (SDB), are currently underway. This paper focuses on SDB extracted from high-resolution optical imagery, highlighting current results as well as the challenges and opportunities CHS will encounter when implementing SDB within its operational chart production process. SDB is of particular interest to CHS due to its ability to supplement depths derived from traditional hydrographic surveys. This is of great importance in shallow and/or remote Canadian waters where achieving wide-area depth coverage through traditional surveys is costly, time-consuming and a safety risk to survey operators. With an accuracy of around 1 m, SDB could be used by CHS to fill gaps in survey data and to provide valuable information in dynamic areas.

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)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.249

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.009
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations80
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueISPRS International Journal of Geo-InformationSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207