Enhancing Turbidity Modeling in the Mississippi River Using Machine Learning and Sentinel‐2 Remote Sensing Data: A Generalizability Analysis
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Turbidity is an important indicator of water quality in hydrology. More traditional ways to monitor turbidity can provide reliable results. However, they are prone to human error, have elevated costs, and lack real-time monitoring capacity. Addressing these hindrances, in this work we combine spectral bands and indices from Sentinel-2 with several machine learning paradigms, namely XGBoost, Random Forests, GMDH, Support Vector Regression, k-Nearest Neighbors and Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator to model turbidity, using data from twelve monitoring stations encompassing the Mississippi River, USA. Results show that considering the individual monitoring stations, the ML paradigms for turbidity modeling were satisfactory at locations with a larger range and standard deviation values, achieving a mean R2 value of 59.5%. Tree-based models were the best overall approach, often ranking as the best or second-best performing model. When all the samples from the monitoring stations were used, the XGBoost provided superior output for turbidity modeling, reaching an R2 equal to 75.7%. A comprehensive comparison with the literature found values showed that the models implemented using this study’s methodology could provide competitive results, deeming it as an alternative for turbidity modeling from remote sensing data.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it