MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401769135 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v10i1.2963

Surface Water Area Detection And Extraction By Using Different Techniques Of Remote Sensing And GIS.

2023· article· en· W4401769135 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Akshay Kshirsagar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrological Forecasting Using AI
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDepartment of Science and Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, India
KeywordsRemote sensingExtraction (chemistry)Computer scienceSurface waterEnvironmental scienceGeographyEnvironmental engineeringChromatographyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Jayakwadi dam built in 1976, is located in Jayakwadi village in Paithan taluka of Chhatrapati Smbhaji Nagar district in Maharashtra, India. Monitoring the surface water area of Jayakwadi Dam is important task because the main purpose of dam water is for drinking water as well as supply to industrial area for Chhatrapati Sambhaji Nagar city people and irrigation. The surface water area can be easily estimated with the help of satellite imagery and remote sensing and GIS technique. The data used to estimate surface water area is Landsat-8 satellite multispectral data. Landsat-8 has resolution of 30 Meter. We used mainly data of 8 Years from 2014 to 2022. NDWI and Maximum likelihood classification technique to estimate surface water area. As compare to maximum likelihood classification, NDWI and water pixel extraction is more accurately calculate the surface area of water reservoir. In this paper the maximum likelihood classification as well as NDWI method comparatively used to find out the surface water area by satellite image.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.137 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicHydrological Forecasting Using AIFrench-language works237,207