A Machine Learning Method for Inland Water Detection Using CYGNSS Data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The inland water bodies are critical components of ecosystems and hydrologic cycles. Thus, the water extent data are crucially important for hydrological and ecological studies. Due to its high temporal resolution, the Cyclone Global Navigation Satellite System (CYGNSS) has the potential for real-time inland water monitoring. In this letter, a high-resolution machine learning (ML) method for detecting inland water content using the CYGNSS data is implemented via the random undersampling boosted (RUSBoost) algorithm. The CYGNSS data of the year 2018 over the Congo and Amazon basins are gridded into <inline-formula xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> <tex-math notation="LaTeX">$0.01^{\circ }\, \times \, 0.01^{\circ }$ </tex-math></inline-formula> cells. The RUSBoost-based classifier is trained and tested with the CYGNSS data over the Congo basin. The data of the Amazon basin that is unknown to the classifier are then used for further evaluation. By only using the observables extracted from the CYGNSS data, the proposed technique is able to detect 95.4% and 93.3% of the water bodies over the Congo and Amazon basins, respectively. The performance of the RUSBoost-based classifier is also compared with an image processing-based inland water detection method. For the Congo and Amazon basins, the RUSBoost-based classifier has a 3.9% and 14.2% higher water detection accuracy, respectively.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 it