MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011805300 · doi:10.3390/w12030872

Automatic Surface Water Mapping Using Polarimetric SAR Data for Long-Term Change Detection

2020· article· en· W3011805300 on OpenAlexaffabout
Wen Zhang, Baoxin Hu, Glen S. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsTrent UniversityMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThresholdingRemote sensingSynthetic aperture radarEnvironmental scienceSurface waterInterferometric synthetic aperture radarChange detectionPolarimetryComputer scienceGeologyArtificial intelligenceImage (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.561
Threshold uncertainty score0.904

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations45
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicFlood Risk Assessment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207