MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Deep learning for pockmark detection: Implications for quantitative seafloor characterization

2022· article· en· W4308928312 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeomorphology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicUnderwater Acoustics Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeologyBathymetrySeafloor spreadingOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Occurring globally, pockmarks are seafloor depressions associated with seabed fluid escape. Pockmark ubiquity and morphologic heterogeneity result in an irregular seafloor that can be difficult to quantitatively describe. To address this challenge, we test the hypothesis that deep-learning based object detection and segmentation can be used to develop data-driven models for pockmark identification and characterization. This study describes the development, testing, and deployment of eight separate deep learning-based pockmark detection models using publicly available, gridded bathymetric data from the Belfast Bay, Maine, USA, Blue Hill Bay, Maine, USA, and Passamaquoddy Bay, New Brunswick, Canada estuarine pockmark fields. The models tested include three types of convolutional neural network architectures, as well as a generative adversarial network. We find that the data-driven models consistently resolve pockmarks from the background seafloor, allowing for quick and accurate delineation of pockmarks in a variety of seabed habitats. With these delineations we examine and compare the morphology of the muddy estuarine pockmark fields. We then compare these morphometric results to pockmark fields in two distinct settings, the sandy German Bight and the Aquitaine continental slope. We find that in all the pockmark fields a power law relationship, generally, exists between pockmark area and pockmark depth, though this relationship deteriorates with the smallest pockmarks, suggesting that there may be a minimum size needed for geomorphic stability. These results show that the training data and trained models developed here can be applied for quick detection and characterization of pockmarks where other high-resolution bathymetry is available, demonstrating the value of data-driven detection models for characterizing morphologically complex seafloors. Last, the morphologic characteristics of pockmarks identified in this study will aid future studies in relating pockmark size to environmental characteristics like seabed sediment texture and regional gradient.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.248 · 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