MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297795979 · doi:10.15485/1571525

Classified channel masks of portions of 13 rivers across the Arctic and areas of floodplain erosion and accretion ranging from 1973 to 2016

2019· dataset· en· W4297795979 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
J. C. Rowland, Sophie Stauffer

Bibliographic record

VenueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) · 2019
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeological Studies and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFloodplainChannel (broadcasting)ErosionAccretion (finance)GeologyThe arcticArcticRangingPhysical geographyGeographyOceanographyGeomorphologyGeodesyCartographyPhysicsComputer scienceTelecommunicationsAstrophysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dataset provides classified river channel masks of 17 reaches of 15 Arctic rivers for river bank erosion and accretion rates, as well as, river channel properties such as channel width, bank curvature, and the aspect/orientation of the river banks. These rivers include the: Chandalar River, Alaska, Colville River, Alaska; Indigirka River, Russia; Kolyma River, Russia; Koyukuk River, Alaska; Lena River, Alaska; Noatak River, Alaska; Ob River, Russia; Pechora River, Russia; Tanana River, Alaska, Selawik River, Alaska; Taz River, Russia; Yana River, Russia; Yenisei River, Russia; and the Yukon River, Alaska. The dataset was generated from a total of 129 images including: Landsat, higher resolution satellite imagery, and aerial photography over time periods ranging from the 1970s and 2016. A full list of the image dates, row and path (for Landsat), and pixel resolutions is provided in the dataset. Masks for the Chandalar River, Tanana River, and Yukon at Holy Cross were obtained from Brown et al. (2020). The masks were analyzed using the Spatially Continuous Riverbank Erosion and Accretion Measurements (SCREAM) software detailed in Rowland et al. 2016. The masks used in this analysis can be found an accompanying dataset (doi:10.15485/1571527). These masks provide the source data for the erosion, accretion, and planform measurement provided in the companion dataset: doi:10.15485/1571527.Revision January 2023:Added masks for Koyukuk River based on imagery from 1978, 2012, and 2018. Added masks based on analysis of Brown et al. (2020) for the Tanana, Chandalar, and Yukon (Holy Cross) Rivers. Update abstract and the image summary file.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.203 · 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

Citations4
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information)Same topicGeological Studies and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207