Validation of Sentinel-3A Based Lake Level over US and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Satellite altimetry is an important contributor for measuring the water level of continental water bodies. The technique has been applied for almost three decades. In this period the data quality has increased and the applications have evolved from the study of a few large lakes and rivers, to near global applications at various scales. Products from current satellite altimetry missions should be validated to continuously improve the measurements. Sentinel-3A has been operating since 2016 and is the first mission operating in synthetic aperture radar (SAR) mode globally. Here we evaluate its performance in capturing lake level variations based on a physical and an empirical retracker provided in the official level 2 product. The validation is performed for more than 100 lakes in the United States and Canada where the altimetry based water levels are compared with in situ data. As validation measures we consider the root mean squared error, the Pearson correlation, and the percentage of outliers. For the US sites the median of the RMSE value is 25 cm and 19 cm and the median of the Pearson correlations are 0.86 and 0.93 for the physical and empirical retracker, respectively. The percentage of outliers (median) is 11% for both retrackers. The validations measures are slightly poorer for the Canadian sites; the median RMSE is approximately 5 cm larger, the Pearson correlation 0.1 lower, and the percentage of outliers 5% larger. The poorer performance for the Canadian sites is mainly related to the presence of lake ice in the winter period where the surface elevations are not able to map the surface correctly. The validation measures improve considerably when evaluated for summer data only. For both areas we show that the reconstruction of the water level variations based on the empirical retracker is significantly better compared to that of the physical retracker in terms of the RMSE and the Pearson correlation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".