-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add aggregation datasets for lake time series data: Permafrost Database for Northern Alaska and Circumpolar Thermokarst Landscapes #37
Comments
Google slides with some simple sketches for data visualizations.in progress --> will be updated from time-to-time |
Lake area time-seriesHere we have 2 datasets: Both datasets can be joined via the ID_merged attribute
|
Thank you for this dataset, metadata, and suggestions for processing, Ingmar! Very much looking forward to visualizing this on the PDG. |
The 2 files for lake area time series have been uploaded to the NCEAS datateam server: |
Update: After rearranging Datateam directories, the data now is on Datateam at: |
Update on lake area time series visualization
|
Producing annual layers for static lake size:
|
@julietcohen
In your dataset, the four regions are separate from each other. Technically they were merged and deduplicated in a previous step. So here there should be no need for that.
Maybe we can increase the max val (upper limit) of the visualization. For my taste the differences are not super great. Some cool ideawe could calculate the diff of each year versus the previous (or some kind of aggregated number of years), e.g. 2019-2018. Then we should be able to visualize major changes such as lake drainage 😄 |
@initze Thank you for your feedback. Here is the link to the PDG demo portal: https://demo.arcticdata.io/portals/permafrost I'll increase the upper limit of the range in my config file and see if that helps create more diversity in colors associated with polygons of different sizes. For example, I could increase the quantile that I am using to set the max value. I was using the 95th quantile, which resulted in a max range value for permanent water of ~49. Increasing to the 99.99th quantile would be a max value of ~6,088. Calculating the diff of each year would be very interesting! I do not think it would be difficult either, since I have already produced the annual files. I can ensure that each file has the same geometries, and we can take the difference for the variables of interest for each geometry. I can work on that after I visualize the 5 years independently. Also, I think maybe a purple palette would be nice for the |
Another note: I have increased the maximum z-level for this data to z-12 (just 1 level higher) after consulting the metadata for the TMS, because we want the resolution of this data to be ~30m (correct me if that's wrong) |
2017 Lake Data UpdateI created web tiles for 2017 with different palettes for permanent water and seasonal water, and used the 99.99th percentile for the highest value in the palette range to show more diversity of colors in the lower values. These are now on the demo portal. Polygon color diversitySpeaking about the visual colors of the polygons, we see that changing the range in the workflow config to the 99.99th percentile for the max value did succeed in showing more diversity for permanent water. In my opinion, the pink & purple palette for seasonal water does not show enough diversity in the smaller lakes, and I should re-process the web tiles with a different percentile for the max value for that attribute. Maybe @initze has feedback on this. We should also keep in mind that the more tailoring we have to do in order to find the best range for the config values to show the most color diversity, the further this workflow gets from being automated. Ideally, we would mathematically determine the best range of values for the config to optimize the color diversity in the polygons without having to guess and check each time. I would appreciate input from anyone who has a good way to achieve this. LegendsThe legends for these 2 layers are accurate, as the max value shown for each layer is indeed the max value for that attribute, not the 99.99th percentile. Additionally, both layers have a min value of 0, and this was the min value in the legend. However, the value range for permanent water is so large that we encounter the same issue we ran into with the Arctic Communities layer: when you hover over the legend, it shows scientific notation, which is accurate but not ideal. This was acceptable for the communities layer, so I assume this is acceptable for this layer, too, for now. Processing other lake data yearsI have moved forward to process 2018-2021, and have already completed 2018 (update: 2018 geotiff data was corrupted during a directory transfer cancelled midway when VS code lost connection. geotiffs need to be re-created). However, there's no point in processing the web tiles for these years until we determine the best way to set the range for each attribute, based on our guess & checks for 2017. I will continue to process staged tiles and geotiffs for all years, but it would be very time consuming to guess and check for the optimal range of values to best represent the polygons. |
I have simplified and added documentation to the script used to clean, merge, and parse Ingmar's 2 input files into the 5 most recent years ( |
All years 2017-2021 have been processed into staged, geotiffs, and web tiles for permanent water and seasonal water. All processing was done on Delta with the ray workflow. The 2017-2018 files have already completed the transfer to Datateam with the pre-issued DOI |
Datasets for lake statistics aggregation
Regional Dataset
Jorgenson: Ecological Mapping and Permafrost Database for Northern Alaska (Final Ecological Mapping Update (2014))
Data Download Link (zipped shp)
Archive/Dataset Link: https://catalog.northslopescience.org/dataset/2236
For data aggregation I would propose to use the field "ECOREGION" and "LITHOLOGY" to start with, i guess once set up we could add others
Pan-Arctic Dataset
Olefeldt: Circumpolar Thermokarst Landscapes, 2015, Circum-Arctic
[Data Download Link (GPKG), with fixed geometries (I had some issues with original file)] https://1drv.ms/u/s!AobXXrP933xWh8lqz5It06Zf8AT9JA?e=yBQaDY
Archive/Dataset Link: https://apgc.awi.de/dataset/ctl-arctic
For data aggregation I would propose to use the field "TKThLP"
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: