MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253047094 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14665284

Detection of waste dumping locations in landfill using multi-temporal landsat thermal images

2021· preprint· en· W4253047094 on OpenAlexaff
Jasravia Gill

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeachateEnvironmental scienceBoreholeMunicipal solid wasteHazardous wasteWaste managementFlux (metallurgy)GroundwaterDumpingLandfill gasHydrology (agriculture)Environmental engineeringRemote sensingGeologyGeotechnical engineeringEngineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The practice of solid waste disposal in conventional landfills has always been associated with adverse environmental impacts, leading to the migration of landfill gas and bad odour to the proximate areas. Apart from the obnoxious fumes and hazardous leachate, the potential of heat generation within these vast disposal sites has been observed during the aerobic and anaerobic decomposition process. Therefore, this study aims to demonstrate how to utilize thermal remote sensing technique to monitor the heat flux, which can aid in detecting the waste dumping location with a case study in the Jeleeb Al-Shuyoukh landfill in Kuwait, where the record of its physical boundary was found missing. Landsat TM/ETM+ images for ten-year (1985 to 1994) were acquired and subsequently processed with atmospheric correction so as to compute the land surface temperature (LST). Through overlay analysis, the multi-temporal LST contours were combined in order to detect the most probable dumping locations within the landfill. With reference to the 50 borehole locations drilled by the Environmental Public Authority of Kuwait, our results derived during the summer season yielded a better accuracy (72%) comparing to that derived during the winter season (70%). This can be explained by the waste decomposition process reaches to the peak in summer and more heat flux can be captured from the ground cover. In addition, the dumping locations buried with construction waste were found to have higher LST as compared to the sites containing organic waste in most of the cases, except for certain locations which contained the mixture of construction and organic waste in winter season.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207