MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300957598 · doi:10.5194/bg-4-781-2007

Detailed validation of the bidirectional effect in various Case 1 waters for application to ocean color imagery

2007· article· en· W4300957598 on OpenAlexfundno aff
A. Morel, David Antoine

Bibliographic record

VenueBiogeosciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCentre National d’Etudes SpatialesEuropean Space AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The radiance viewed from the ocean depends on the illumination and viewing geometry along with the water properties, and this variation is called the bidirectional effect. This bidirectional effect depends on the inherent optical properties of the water, including the volume scattering function, and is important when comparing data from different satellite sensors. The current model of f/Q, which contains the bidirectional effect, by Morel et al. (2002) depends on modeled, not measured, water parameters, thus must be carefully validated. In this paper we combined upwelling radiance distribution data from several cruises, in varied water types and with a wide range of solar zenith angles. We compared modeled and measured Lview/Lnadir and found that the average difference between the model and data was less than 0.01, while the RMS difference between the model and data was on the order of 0.02–0.03. This is well within the statistical noise of the data, which was on the order of 0.04–0.05, due to environmental noise sources such as wave focusing.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.994

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiogeosciencesSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207