Automatic Surface Water Mapping Using Polarimetric SAR Data for Long-Term Change Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mapping the distribution and persistence of surface water in a timely fashion has broad value for tracking dynamic events like flooding, and for monitoring the effects of climate and human activities on natural resource values and biodiversity. Traditionally, surface water is mapped from optical imagery using semi-automatic approaches. However, this process is time-consuming and the accuracy of results can vary among image interpreters. In recent years, Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) images have been increasingly used. Microwave signals sensitive to water content make SAR systems useful for mapping surface water, saturated soils, and flooded vegetation. In this study, a fully automatic method based on robust stepwise thresholding was developed to map and track the change in the extent of surface water using Polarimetric SAR data. The application of this method in both Radarsat-2 and Sentinel-1 data in central Ontario, Canada demonstrates that the developed robust stepwise thresholding approach could facilitate rapid mapping of open water areas with a promising accuracy of over 95%. In addition, the time-series extent of surface water extracted from May 2008 to August 2016 reveals the dynamic nature of surface inundation, and the trend was consistent with the local precipitation data.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".