2024
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecss.2023.108577
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An improved method for water depth mapping in turbid waters based on a machine learning model

Yitao Liang,
Zhixin Cheng,
Yixiao Du
et al.
Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2024
2024
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Most of the published studies involving Landsat images use simple approaches of either original bands or the band ratio coupled with linear models (i.e., Stumpf model [24], Generalized additive model (GAM) [23], Lyzenga optical model [19] or common ML models [27]). While this approach showed promising confidence in water depth estimation in clear coastal and ocean waters, there was a great variation in accuracy in inland turbid waters (e.g., river [22], estuary [28]).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Most of the published studies involving Landsat images use simple approaches of either original bands or the band ratio coupled with linear models (i.e., Stumpf model [24], Generalized additive model (GAM) [23], Lyzenga optical model [19] or common ML models [27]). While this approach showed promising confidence in water depth estimation in clear coastal and ocean waters, there was a great variation in accuracy in inland turbid waters (e.g., river [22], estuary [28]).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fewer studies were found for bathymetry mapping in turbid water (i.e., rivers and lagoons) using Landsat imagery. We found an optimal band ratio approach coupled with Landsat 9 [22] and a fused model of Adaboost and XGB (Adaboost-XGB) integrated into Landsat 8 [28] to derive the depth map in turbid water, all of which enhanced but varied the model confidence to R 2 = 0.86 and 0.97, respectively. Liang et al 2024 [28] implemented the fused Adaboost-XGB in a mixed area of clear and turbid water, while Niroumand-Jadidi et al 2021 [22] deployed the retrieval model in different turbidity conditions but with a large variation in the coefficient of determination (0.44 -0.86), leaving uncertainty in estimated depth in shallow and turbid waters.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This degradation in light induces alterations in the spectral properties of the satellite imagery and LiDAR sensors, potentially leading to diminished image contrast. Consequently, this can compromise the precision of mapping shallow water depths, as the accuracy in delineating these regions is adversely impacted, with high turbidity levels [37].…”
Section: Challenges Of the Hydrographic Surveys In The Study Areamentioning
confidence: 99%