MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4221111537 · doi:10.3390/rs14051254

Comparing Sentinel-2 and WorldView-3 Imagery for Coastal Bottom Habitat Mapping in Atlantic Canada

2022· article· en· W4221111537 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kristen L. Wilson, Melisa C. Wong, Emmanuel Devred

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaEuropean Space Agency
KeywordsSeagrassHabitatRemote sensingSatellite imageryMarine habitatsSatelliteEnvironmental scienceGeographyCartographyEcologyOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Satellite remote sensing is a valuable tool to map and monitor the distribution of marine macrophytes such as seagrass and seaweeds that perform many ecological functions and services in coastal habitats. Various satellites have been used to map the distribution of these coastal bottom habitat-forming species, with each sensor providing unique benefits. In this study, we first explored optimal methods to create bottom habitat maps using WorldView-3 satellite imagery. We secondly compared the WorldView-3 bottom habitat maps to previously produced Sentinel-2 maps in a temperate, optically complex environment in Nova Scotia, Canada to identify the top performing classification and the advantages and disadvantages of each sensor. Sentinel-2 provides a global, freely accessible dataset where four bands are available at a 10-m spatial resolution in the visible and near infrared spectrum. Conversely, WorldView-3 is a commercial satellite where eight bands are available at a 2-m spatial resolution in the visible and near infrared spectrum, but data catalogs are costly and limited in scope. Our optimal WorldView-3 workflow processed images from digital numbers to habitat classification maps, and included a semiautomatic stripe correction. Our comparison of bottom habitat maps explored the impact of improved WorldView-3 spatial resolution in isolation, and the combined advantage of both WorldView’s increased spatial and spectral resolution relative to Sentinel-2. We further explored the effect of tidal height on classification success, and relative changes in water clarity between images collected at different dates. As expected, both sensors are suitable for bottom habitat mapping. The value of WorldView-3 came from both its increased spatial and spectral resolution, particularly for fragmented vegetation, and the value of Sentinel-2 imagery comes from its global dataset that readily allows for large scale habitat mapping. Given the variation in scale, cost and resolution of the two sensors, we provide recommendations on their use for mapping and monitoring marine macrophyte habitat in Atlantic Canada, with potential applications to other coastal areas of the world.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations25
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207