A Segmentation Approach to Identify Underwater Dunes from Digital Bathymetric Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The recognition of underwater dunes has a central role to ensure safe navigation. Indeed, the presence of these dynamic landforms on the seafloor represents a hazard for navigation, especially in navigation channels, and should be at least highlighted to avoid collision with vessels. This paper proposes a novel method dedicated to the segmentation of these landforms in the fluvio-marine context. Its originality relies on the use of a conceptual model in which dunes are characterized by three salient features, namely the crest line, the stoss trough, and the lee trough. The proposed segmentation implements the conceptual model by considering the DBM (digital bathymetric model) as the seafloor surface from which the dunes shall be segmented. A geomorphometric analysis of the seabed is conducted to identify the salient features of the dunes. It is followed by an OBIA (object-based image analysis) approach aiming to eliminate the pixel-based analysis of the seabed surface, forming objects to better describe the dunes present in the seafloor. To validate the segmentation method, more than 850 dunes were segmented in the fluvio-marine context of the Northern Traverse of the Saint-Lawrence river. A performance rate of nearly 92% of well segmented dunes (i.e., true positive) was achieved.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".