Comparison of Historical Water Temperature Measurements with Landsat Analysis Ready Data Provisional Surface Temperature Estimates for the Yukon River in Alaska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water temperature is a key element of freshwater ecological systems and a critical element within natural resource monitoring programs. In the absence of in situ measurements, remote sensing platforms can indirectly measure water temperature over time and space. The Earth Resources Observation and Science (EROS) Center has processed archived Landsat imagery into analysis ready data (ARD), including Level-2 Provisional Surface Temperature (pST) estimates derived from the Landsat 4–5 Thematic Mapper (TM), Landsat 7 Enhanced Thematic Mapper Plus (ETM+), and Landsat 8 Thermal Infrared Sensor (TIRS). We compared in situ measurements of water temperature within the Yukon River in Alaska with 52 instances of pST estimates between June 2014 and September 2020. Agreement was good with an RMSE of 2.25 °C and only a slight negative bias in the estimated mean daily water temperature of −0.47 °C. For the 52 dates compared, the average daily water temperature measured by the USGS streamgage was 11.3 °C with a standard deviation of 5.7 °C. The average daily pST estimate was 10.8 °C with a standard deviation of 6.1 °C. At least in the case of large unstratified rivers in Alaska, ARD pST can be used to infer water temperature in the absence of or in tandem with ground-based water temperature monitoring campaigns.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".