Development of an approach based on historical Landsat data for delineating Canadian flood zones at different return periods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study addresses the need for flood risk anticipation and planning, through the development of a flood zone mapping approach for different return periods, in order to best prevent and protect populations. Today, traditional methods are too costly, too slow or require too many requirements to be applied over large areas. As part of a project funded by the Canadian Space Agency, Geosapiens and the Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique set themselves the goal of designing an automatic process to generate water presence maps for different return periods at a resolution of 30 m, based on the historical database of Landsat missions from 1982 to the present day. This involved the design, implementation and training of a deep learning algorithm model based on the U-Net architecture for the detection of water pixels in Landsat imagery. The resulting maps were used as the basis for applying a frequency analysis model to fit a probability of occurrence function for the presence of water at each pixel. The frequency analysis data were then used to obtain maps of water occurrence at different return preiods such as 2, 5 and 20 years.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".