MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403799016 · doi:10.1002/hyp.15316

Modelling the Contributions of Riparian Vegetation and Topography to Stream Shade Using <scp>LiDAR</scp> and Conventional Digital Elevation Data

2024· article· en· W4403799016 on OpenAlexafffund
Bryce C. Browning, R. D. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRiparian zoneDigital elevation modelLidarElevation (ballistics)Vegetation (pathology)Remote sensingEnvironmental scienceGeologyHabitatEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Stream temperature is widely considered the master variable in stream ecosystems. One of the key drivers of diel and seasonal stream temperature variability is the solar radiation received at the stream surface, which can be influenced by shading associated with both larger scale topographic features and riparian vegetation. In this study, a stream shade model was developed that uses LiDAR point cloud data to model shading by riparian vegetation, including canopy overhang, and conventional elevation data to model stream shading by topography. The model was applied to a dominantly north–south oriented river flowing in a floodplain within a mountain valley. When compared with shade interpreted from PlanetScope visual imagery, the model predicted stream shade at the point scale with 92% agreement. Sources of error were attributed to pixel and azimuth band size, which can be refined within the model arguments, although at the cost of increased processing time. The shade model was re‐run after virtually rotating the reach by 90° and 270° clockwise to evaluate the effect of valley orientation. Peak reach‐wide sunlight exposure occurred approximately 2 h later in the day when the stream reach was rotated 90°, and produced greater shading from mid‐morning to mid‐afternoon. Further work should test the model on smaller streams using ground‐based oblique or drone‐based photography to provide ground‐truthing, particularly to assess the accuracy of predicted shade below over‐hanging vegetation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207