MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3148195563 · doi:10.3390/rs13071257

Landsat 8 Lake Water Clarity Empirical Algorithms: Large-Scale Calibration and Validation Using Government and Citizen Science Data from across Canada

2021· article· en· W3148195563 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Eliza S. Deutsch, Jeffrey A. Cardille, Talia Koll-Egyed, Marie‐Josée Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAlberta Environment and ParksUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsRemote sensingCLARITYSatelliteCalibrationComputer scienceScale (ratio)OutlierMatching (statistics)Environmental scienceSatellite imageryFilter (signal processing)AlgorithmCartographyGeographyArtificial intelligenceMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water clarity has been extensively assessed in Landsat-based remote sensing studies of inland waters, regularly relying on locally calibrated empirical algorithms, and close temporal matching between field data and satellite overpass. As more satellite data and faster data processing systems become readily accessible, new opportunities are emerging to revisit traditional assumptions concerning empirical calibration methodologies. Using Landsat 8 images with large water clarity datasets from southern Canada, we assess: (1) whether clear regional differences in water clarity algorithm coefficients exist and (2) whether model fit can be improved by expanding temporal matching windows. We found that a single global algorithm effectively represents the empirical relationship between in situ Secchi disk depth (SDD) and the Landsat 8 Blue/Red band ratio across diverse lake types in Canada. We also found that the model fit improved significantly when applying a median filter on data from ever-wider time windows between the date of in situ SDD sample and the date of satellite overpass. The median filter effectively removed the outliers that were likely caused by atmospheric artifacts in the available imagery. Our findings open new discussions on the ability of large datasets and temporal averaging methods to better elucidate the true relationships between in situ water clarity and satellite reflectance 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations20
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207