MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206701427 · doi:10.1080/07038992.2021.1946385

Automated Coastal Ice Mapping with SAR Can Inform Winter Fish Ecology in the Laurentian Great Lakes

2021· article· en· W3206701427 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
James V. Marcaccio, Jesse Gardner Costa, Jill L. Brooks, Christine M. Boston, Steven J. Cooke, Jonathan D. Midwood

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Remote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOverwinteringHabitatGeographyEcologyFisherySea iceIchthyoplanktonEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingPhysical geographyOceanographyFish <Actinopterygii>GeologyBiologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many freshwater lakes in the temperate zone undergo annual freeze-thaw cycles. Climate change has disrupted these patterns and altered habitat for many species including ecologically, economically, and culturally valuable fish species. To understand the relationship between ice cover and aquatic species, suitable data can be derived from remote sensing. We developed a novel ice classification method with minimal user input using freely available Sentinel-1 data and an adjacent and time-coincident validation dataset. Using image object segmentation and a random forest classifier, ice conditions were classified correctly with >85% overall accuracy. Our ice mapping efforts coincided with a telemetry dataset of tagged Walleye (Sander vitreus) and Northern Pike (Esox lucius) in Hamilton Harbor in western Lake Ontario. Between years with low and high ice covers (2017 and 2019, respectively), we found Walleye appeared to reduce their area of movement when the harbor was covered in ice. Our ice mapping tool can provide a quick and consistent method for agencies to adopt for freshwater resource management as well as provide ice cover information in coastal areas that are important overwintering habitat for many fishes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.966

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Remote SensingSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207