MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210452150 · doi:10.3390/rs14030644

Incorporating Aleatoric Uncertainties in Lake Ice Mapping Using RADARSAT–2 SAR Images and CNNs

2022· article· en· W4210452150 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nastaran Saberi, Katharine Scott, Claude Duguay

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersGlobal Water FuturesCanada First Research Excellence Fund
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkRemote sensingOpen waterSynthetic aperture radarComputer scienceBathymetrySea iceEnvironmental scienceArtificial intelligenceGeologyClimatologyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the increasing availability of SAR imagery in recent years, more research is being conducted using deep learning (DL) for the classification of ice and open water; however, ice and open water classification using conventional DL methods such as convolutional neural networks (CNNs) is not yet accurate enough to replace manual analysis for operational ice chart mapping. Understanding the uncertainties associated with CNN model predictions can help to quantify errors and, therefore, guide efforts on potential enhancements using more–advanced DL models and/or synergistic approaches. This paper evaluates an approach for estimating the aleatoric uncertainty [a measure used to identify the noise inherent in data] of CNN probabilities to map ice and open water with a custom loss function applied to RADARSAT–2 HH and HV observations. The images were acquired during the 2014 ice season of Lake Erie and Lake Ontario, two of the five Laurentian Great Lakes of North America. Operational image analysis charts from the Canadian Ice Service (CIS), which are based on visual interpretation of SAR imagery, are used to provide training and testing labels for the CNN model and to evaluate the accuracy of the model predictions. Bathymetry, as a variable that has an impact on the ice regime of lakes, was also incorporated during model training in supplementary experiments. Adding aleatoric loss and bathymetry information improved the accuracy of mapping water and ice. Results are evaluated quantitatively (accuracy metrics) and qualitatively (visual comparisons). Ice and open water scores were improved in some sections of the lakes by using aleatoric loss and including bathymetry. In Lake Erie, the ice score was improved by ∼2 on average in the shallow near–shore zone as a result of better mapping of dark ice (low backscatter) in the western basin. As for Lake Ontario, the open water score was improved by ∼6 on average in the deepest profundal off–shore zone.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
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

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicArctic and Antarctic ice dynamicsFrench-language works237,207