MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387376837 · doi:10.1364/oe.500340

A tuned ocean color algorithm for the Arctic Ocean: a solution for waters with high CDM content

2023· article· en· W4387376837 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Juan Li, Atsushi Matsuoka, Stanford B. Hooker, Stéphane Maritorena, Xiaoping Pang, Marcel Babin

Bibliographic record

VenueOptics Express · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada First Research Excellence FundArcticNetJapan Aerospace Exploration AgencyNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsOcean colorArcticEnvironmental sciencePhytoplanktonOceanographyClimate changeColored dissolved organic matterRemote sensingChlorophyll aIrradianceMarine ecosystemThe arcticClimatologyAlgorithmEcosystemSatelliteComputer scienceEcologyGeologyPhysicsOpticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Arctic Ocean (AO) is the most river-influenced ocean. Located at the land-sea interface wherein phytoplankton blooms are common, Arctic coastal waterbodies are among the most affected regions by climate change. Given phytoplankton are critical for energy transfer supporting marine food webs, accurate estimation of chlorophyll a concentration (Chl), which is frequently used as a proxy of phytoplankton biomass, is critical for improving our knowledge of the Arctic marine ecosystem and its response to the ongoing climate change. Due to the unique and complex bio-optical properties of the AO, efforts are still needed to obtain more accurate Chl estimates, especially for coastal waters with high colored detrital material (CDM) content. In this study, we optimized the the Garver-Siegel-Maritorena (GSM) algorithm, using an Arctic bio-optical dataset comprised of seven wavelengths (the original GSM wavelengths plus 625 nm). Results suggested that our tuned algorithm, denoted GSMA, outperformed an alternative AO GSM algorithm denoted AO.GSM, but the accuracy of Chl estimates was only improved by 8%. In addition, GSMA showed appreciable robustness when assessed using a satellite image and two non-Arctic coastal datasets.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOptics ExpressSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207