MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408483837 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-21430

Optimizing the revisiting frequency of remotely sensed thermal observations for continuous estimation of ecosystem evapotranspiration and productivity using Bayesian inference

2025· preprint· en· W4408483837 on OpenAlexaff
Arnau Riba Palou, Monica Garcia, Ana M. Tarquís, Cecilio Oyonarte, Francisco Domingo, Jun S. Liu, Mark S. Johnson, Yeonuk Kim, Sheng Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEvapotranspirationInferenceProductivityBayesian probabilityEnvironmental scienceEstimationBayesian inferenceEcosystemRemote sensingComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeographyEcologyEngineeringEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the energy, water, and carbon fluxes in dryland ecosystems is essential for maintaining ecosystem functioning and biodiversity. The limited in-situ measurements in drylands pose a significant challenge to the accurate monitoring and modelling of ecosystem dynamics. Satellite remote sensing provides high potential to monitor key surface and carbon variables, such as land surface temperature (LST), evapotranspiration (ET) and gross primary productivity (GPP). Although these data provide valuable insights, their temporal resolution is limited to satellite revisit overpasses, which can limit the continuity of monitoring. To address these gaps, dynamic land surface models serve as effective tools for integrating sparse remote sensing observations with continuous simulations of energy, water, and carbon cycles. The Soil-Vegetation-atmosphere Energy, water, and CO2 traNsfer (SVEN) model exemplifies this approach, offering high temporal resolution simulations that incorporate satellite-based LST and meteorological in-situ inputs. This study focuses on calibrating and validating the model in southeastern Spain, as the only sub-desertic protected area in Europe. Calibration of SVEN was achieved using a combination of MODIS remote sensing data and in-situ LST measurements from an eddy covariance system, ensuring robust parameterization tailored to local field characteristics. Furthermore, the model was validated with in situ measurements, obtained through an eddy covariance tower. The RMSE values for the land surface temperature, latent heat flux, net radiation, sensible heat flux, gross primary productivity, and soil moisture were 1.99 ºC, 25.97 W m-2, 52.71 W m-2, 50.90 W m-2, 1.44 gCm-2s-1 and 1.19 m3m-3, respectively at half-hourly time scale. Normalized root mean square deviations of the simulated values were 7.84%, 10.81%, 5.67%, 7.81%, 13.09% and 6.59%, respectively. Otherwise, it was observed that until 8 days of revisit frequency, the calibration parameters did not affect the model accuracy considerably, increasing the RMSE of variables by 0.42 to 10.53% at the half-hourly time scale. The model’s accuracy across energy, water, and carbon fluxes highlights its potential as a reliable tool for dryland monitoring, offering insights into processes that are critical for ecological management and climate adaptation strategies. By filling the temporal gap between satellite observations, this work demonstrates the value of dynamic models like SVEN in enhancing our understanding of dryland ecosystems and promoting sustainable management practices in water-limited environments. This publication is supported by the EU COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) Action CA22136 “Pan-European Network of Green Deal Agriculture and Forestry Earth Observation Science” (PANGEOS).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicNeural Networks and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207