MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2901661220 · doi:10.4095/300213

Mapping water bodies using SAR imagery - an application over the Spiritwood valley aquifer, Manitoba

2017· report· en· W2901661220 on OpenAlexaffabout
J Li, Shusen Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAquiferGeologyRemote sensingGeomorphologyHydrology (agriculture)CartographyGroundwaterGeographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada has over 2 million lakes covering a total area of 0.9 million km2. The inland water bodies play a critical role in water cycles, water resources, social economic including fisheries and recreation. However, these inland aquatic ecosystems are under increasing pressure and big changes from increasing human activities and changing climate. To better understand the aquatic ecosystem dynamics and effectively manage the inland water bodies, it is essential to have up-to-date information of their spatial and temporal variability. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR), unlike optical sensors, is able to penetrate cloud, haze and smoke, and hence observe the earth's surface in all weather conditions day and night. SAR imagery is an effective method for mapping water bodies. This open file details the algorithms and their implementations for a novel method for mapping water bodies using SAR imageries. This method is completely automatic and less computational intensive, thus suitable for large-scale applications. A test of this method over the Spiritwood valley in Manitoba using Radarsat-2/SAR data shows a high accuracy in delineating water bodies. This study provides a tool for mapping national scale inland water bodies and monitoring their dynamic changes in a near-real time environment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.101
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207