MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392582331 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu24-12005

A Machine Learning Framework for Extending SMOS Surface Soil Moisture Observations over Canada

2024· preprint· en· W4392582331 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jeenu John, Laxmi Sushama, S. Roose

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Moisture and Remote Sensing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceRemote sensingMoistureWater contentSurface (topology)Soil scienceComputer scienceMeteorologyGeologyGeographyMathematicsGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuous and long-term surface soil moisture (SSM) data is essential for advancing the understanding of land-atmospheric interactions and climate change studies. Despite the contributions of different satellite missions in acquiring SSM measurements, the presence of data gaps poses a significant challenge. In this study, a machine learning (ML) framework is developed to expand the Soil Moisture Ocean Salinity (SMOS) SSM observations in both spatial and temporal domains over Canada. In the initial phase of the proposed framework, ML models, including random forest (RF) and convolutional neural network (CNN), are trained and validated using SSM-relevant climatic and geophysical variables extracted from the fifth-generation European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) reanalysis data (ERA5) for the 2011 to 2020 period and SMOS SSM for the same period as the target variable. While evaluating the developed models with unseen data from the years 2021 and 2022, the RF model shows slightly better performance when compared to that of CNN. The average root mean square error (RMSE) for RF is 0.0369 m3/m3 (Pearson correlation coefficient, R=0.94), while for CNN, the RMSE is 0.0494 m3/m3 (R= 0.89), with prediction biases mostly noted for regions with large inter-annual variability. Similarly, RF and CNN yield average RMSE values of 0.014 m3/m3 and 0.0635 m3/m3, respectively, when evaluated for spatial filling for the case of grid cells excluded during the training process. Hence, in the second phase of the proposed framework, the RF model is selected to extend the SMOS dataset for the 2008-2010 period. The temporal correlation analysis between the extended SMOS and Advanced Scatterometer (ASCAT) indicates reasonable correlations with values above 0.6, while the spatial correlation analysis reveals similar patterns between the two datasets, with smaller values for the summer season owing to the importance of local processes on SSM during this period. However, spatiotemporal extension of SSM to encompass surface types excluded during training remains a challenge and needs further studies. The developed framework holds the potential to address the spatio-temporal data gaps in other regions since both datasets are globally available.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.360
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.250
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSoil Moisture and Remote SensingFrench-language works237,207