Monitoring of water table dynamics in peatlands with OPTRAM: Towards globally applicable algorithms in Google Earth Engine using Landsat and Sentinel-2
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fluctuations of water table depth (WTD) affect many processes in peatlands, such as vegetation development and emissions of greenhouse gases. Here, we present the OPtical TRApezoid Model (OPTRAM) as a new method for satellite-based monitoring of the temporal variation of WTD in peatlands. OPTRAM is based on the response of short-wave infrared reflectance to the vegetation water status. For five northern peatlands with long-term in-situ WTD records, and with diverse vegetation cover and hydrological regimes, we generate a suite of OPTRAM index time series using (a) different procedures to parametrise OPTRAM (peatland-specific manual vs. globally applicable automatic parametrisation in Google Earth Engine), and (b) different satellite input data (Landsat vs. Sentinel-2). The results based on the manual parametrisation of OPTRAM indicate a high correlation with in-situ WTD time-series for pixels with most suitable vegetation for OPTRAM application (mean Pearson correlation of 0.7 across sites), and we will present the performance differences when moving from a manual to an automatic procedure. Furthermore, for the overlap period of Landsat and Sentinel-2, which have different ranges and widths of short-wave infrared bands used for OPTRAM calculation, the impact of the satellite input data to OPTRAM will be analysed. Eventually, the challenge of merging different satellite missions in the derivation of OPTRAM time series will be explored as an important step towards a global application of OPTRAM for the monitoring of WTD dynamics in northern peatlands.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".