Impact of Spectral Resolution on Quantifying Cyanobacteria in Lakes and Reservoirs: A Machine-Learning Assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cyanobacterial harmful algal blooms are an increasing threat to coastal and inland waters. These blooms can be detected using optical radiometers due to the presence of phycocyanin (PC) pigments. The spectral resolution of best-available multispectral sensors limits their ability to diagnostically detect PC in the presence of other photosynthetic pigments. To assess the role of spectral resolution in the determination of PC, a large ($N =905$) database of colocatedin situradiometric spectra and PC are employed. We first examine the performance of selected widely used machine-learning (ML) models against that of benchmark algorithms for hyperspectral remote sensing reflectance ($R_{\mathrm {rs}}$) spectra resampled to the spectral configuration of the Hyperspectral Imager for the Coastal Ocean (HICO) with a full-width at half-maximum (FWHM) of$R_{\mathrm {rs}}$spectra resampled to the band configuration of existing satellite instruments and of the one proposed for the next Landsat sensor. These results confirm that employing MLP models to estimate PC from hyperspectral data delivers tangible improvements compared with retrievals from multispectral data and benchmark algorithms (with median errors between$\sim 73$% and 126%) and shows promise for developing a globally applicable cyanobacteria measurement approach.
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 | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".