A Multi-Satellite Mapping Framework for Floating Kelp Forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kelp forests provide key habitat on the Pacific Coast of Canada; however, the long-term changes in their distribution and abundance remain poorly understood. With advances in satellite technology, floating kelp forests can now be monitored across large-scale areas. We present a methodological framework using an object-based image analysis approach that enables the combination of imagery from multiple satellites at different spatial resolutions and temporal coverage, to map kelp forests with floating canopy through time. The framework comprises four steps: (1) compilation and quality assessment; (2) preprocessing; (3) an object-oriented classification; and (4) an accuracy assessment. Additionally, the impact of spatial resolution on the detectability of floating kelp forests is described. Overall, this workflow was successful in producing accurate maps of floating kelp forests, with global accuracy scores of between 88% and 94%. When comparing the impact of resolution on detectability, lower resolutions were less reliable at detecting small kelp forests in high slope areas. Based on the analysis, we suggest removing high slope areas (11.4%) from time series analyses using high- to medium-resolution satellite imagery and that error, in this case up to 7%, be considered when comparing imagery at different resolutions in low–mid slope areas through time.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".