A comparison of Satellite Derived Versus In-Situ Chlorophyll Values on Two Manitoba Great Lakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The waters of Lakes Winnipegosis and Manitoba are Case II waters, meaning their optical properties are influenced not only by phytoplankton (chlorophyll-a) but also by total suspended sediments (TSS) and coloured dissolved organic matter (CDOM). Large areas in these lakes are very shallow, so that either bottom reflectance (depths vary from 2 - 9 meters) or submersed vegetation add more complexity, making it difficult to monitor chlorophyll-a and TSS with both precision and accuracy. In other large lakes in the Canadian prairies (e.g. Lake Winnipeg and Lake of the Woods), local calibration using in situ data has been useful for retrieval of these parameters In the open water seasons in 2016 to 2017, surface and bottom water quality samples were taken at 43 stations throughout Lakes Manitoba, Winnipegosis and Waterhen. Sites were sampled three times per year (spring, summer and fall) to capture a variety of open water conditions. At selected sites, a field spectrometer (ASD fieldSpec Pro) was used to measure surface reflectance over the spectral range used by ocean colour satellites.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".