MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3158028632 · doi:10.52638/rfpt.2018.393

ESTIMATION DES CONCENTRATIONS DE SEDIMENTS EN SUSPENSION DANS LES EAUX COTIERES A PARTIR D'IMAGES PLEIADES

2020· article· fr· W3158028632 on OpenAlexaffabout
Yacine Bouroubi, Marc Desrosiers, Thuy Nguyen-Xuan

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue Française de Photogrammétrie et de Télédétection · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsEffigis (Canada)Public Works and Government Services CanadaUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryHumanitiesGeologyPhysicsGeographyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les travaux de dragage peuvent occasionner la remise en suspension de sédiments contaminés dans la colonne d'eau et leur transport vers les sites aquacoles. Effigis, en collaboration avec Travaux publics et Services gouvernementaux Canada et l'Agence spatiale canadienne, a développé une méthodologie de suivi des concentrations de sédiments en suspension (CSS) en mer à partir d'imagerie satellitaire. Un examen de l'état de l'art a permis de passer en revue les méthodes existantes pour l'estimation des CSS, les capteurs qui répondent aux besoins et les protocoles d'échantillonnage terrain permettant de valider l'approche. La méthodologie retenue repose sur l'utilisation d'un modèle empirique pour l'estimation de la CSS à partir des réflectances de l'eau. La constellation Pléiades a été retenue en raison de son potentiel à estimer la CSS, sa capacité à acquérir des images à des dates spécifiques et à mettre en place une application opérationnelle. Les résultats montrent que les corrélations entre les mesures et les estimations de CSS s'approchent des 80%, avec des erreurs RMSE de l'ordre de 25%.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue Française de Photogrammétrie et de TélédétectionSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207