MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206083521 · doi:10.3390/rs14020267

Open-Source Analysis of Submerged Aquatic Vegetation Cover in Complex Waters Using High-Resolution Satellite Remote Sensing: An Adaptable Framework

2022· article· en· W4206083521 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Arthur de Grandpré, Christophe Kinnard, Andrea Bertolo

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCenter for Northern StudiesUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesGroupe de recherche interuniversitaire en limnologieNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsMinistère des Forêts, de la Faune et des ParcsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
KeywordsRemote sensingMultispectral imageEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceLand coverEcologyGeographyLand use

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite being recognized as a key component of shallow-water ecosystems, submerged aquatic vegetation (SAV) remains difficult to monitor over large spatial scales. Because of SAV’s structuring capabilities, high-resolution monitoring of submerged landscapes could generate highly valuable ecological data. Until now, high-resolution remote sensing of SAV has been largely limited to applications within costly image analysis software. In this paper, we propose an example of an adaptable open-sourced object-based image analysis (OBIA) workflow to generate SAV cover maps in complex aquatic environments. Using the R software, QGIS and Orfeo Toolbox, we apply radiometric calibration, atmospheric correction, a de-striping correction, and a hierarchical iterative OBIA random forest classification to generate SAV cover maps based on raw DigitalGlobe multispectral imagery. The workflow is applied to images taken over two spatially complex fluvial lakes in Quebec, Canada, using Quickbird-02 and Worldview-03 satellites. Classification performance based on training sets reveals conservative SAV cover estimates with less than 10% error across all classes except for lower SAV growth forms in the most turbid waters. In light of these results, we conclude that it is possible to monitor SAV distribution using high-resolution remote sensing within an open-sourced environment with a flexible and functional workflow.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207