Remote Sensing and Clustering Applications in Landscape Hydrology: Characterizing a Subarctic Watershed in Nunavik (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydrological data are often sparse and incomplete for large northern watershed with difficult access. Landscape hydrology approaches are useful for the indirect assessment of their hydrological characteristics by analysing the landscape properties of the watersheds. In this study, we use unsupervised Geographic Object-Based Image Analysis (GeOBIA) paired with the Fuzzy C-Means (FCM) clustering algorithm to produce a total of seven high-resolution territorial classifications for the 1985-2019 time-period. Each classification spans 5-year period and is based on key hydro-geomorphic metrics. Our application site is the George River watershed (GRW), draining a 42 000 km2 area and is located in Nunavik, northern Québec (Canada). The retrieved subwatersheds within the GRW are used as the objects of the GeOBIA and are classified in function of their hydrological similarities. First, classification results for the time-period 2015-2019 show that the GRW is composed of two main types of subwatersheds distributed along a latitudinal gradient. This indicates differences in water balance, and hydrological regime and response. Second, six other classifications are then computed for the period 1985-2014 to investigate past changes in hydrological behavior. The seven-classification time series present an expansion of the southern-type subwatersheds northwards, principally along the George River’s main channel. This expansion is due to increases of (i) vegetation production and (ii) moisture content in soil and canopy. These are the major changes occurring in the land cover metrics of the GRW. We speculate that a rise in vegetation production contributes to evapotranspiration increase and therefore induces changes in water balance, which could explain the measured decrease of about 1% in the George River’s discharge since the mid-1970s.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".