MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7066281090

The hyperspectral determination of Sphagnum water content in a bog

2014· dissertation· en· W7066281090 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2014
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicLaser-Plasma Interactions and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSphagnumHyperspectral imagingBogContext (archaeology)Vegetation (pathology)Water contentGravimetric analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sphagnum's strong water-holding capacities, its dominance in bogs, and the overall importance of water in regulating photosynthesis make it a key ecosystem engineer.Though its effectiveness in this context has rarely been tested, Spectral Vegetation Indices (SVIs) derived from hyperspectral data allow for efficient modeling of Sphagnum gravimetric water content over large scales.This study tests whether a linear model relating a SVI to Sphagnum gravimetric water content (i.e. S. capillifolium, S. magellanicum, S. angustifolium/S.fallax, or all Sphagnum species pooled together) can be applied to the landscape level using airborne hyperspectral imagery taken over Mer Bleue Bog, near Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.The depth of a Sphagnum species sample contributing to the reflectance and the vertical distribution of water across a species sample was also analyzed to test the accuracy of water content measurements.Additionally, image SVI data were compared to field SVI data to test the effectiveness of image spectra.Results indicate that light penetrated 1.5 cm in S. capillifolium samples, 1.0 cm in S. magellanicum samples, and 2.5 cm in S. angustifolium/S.fallax samples.Water variability was highest in samples with elevated water contents for every Sphagnum species analyzed.The Normalized Difference Water Index (NDWI) (dimensionless) was the most effective in estimating Sphagnum gravimetric water content of all SVIs (Root Mean Square Error=161.34%,P= 0.000).Image NDWI values mimicked field NDWI values (Root Mean Square Error= 0.000740, P= 0.0000).The application of the NDWI to areas identified as being favorable for Sphagnum growth in an image resulted in a map of Sphagnum gravimetric water content for a given day in a bog.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.768
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicLaser-Plasma Interactions and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207