Skip to main content
The limits of ecological decodability of a geospatial foundation-model embedding: a registered evaluation of AlphaEarth over shallow Great Barrier Reef habitats

The limits of ecological decodability of a geospatial foundation-model embedding: a registered evaluation of AlphaEarth over shallow Great Barrier Reef habitats

This is a Preprint and has not been peer reviewed. This is version 2 of this Preprint.

Add a Comment

You must log in to post a comment.


Comments

There are no comments or no comments have been made public for this article.

Downloads

Download Preprint

Supplementary Files

Authors

Adam Cropp 

Abstract

Annual satellite embedding fields compress a year of multi-sensor observation into one vector per 10 m pixel, worldwide. We test what ecological information the AlphaEarth embedding holds about shallow (< 10 m) Great Barrier Reef habitats, and where its limits lie. Every candidate output was registered with a pass gate before testing, evaluated under one fixed protocol, and reported pass or fail. Ground truth spans 104,668 photo-quadrat images at one reef over seven years, 67 further reef surveys in two eras, and independent point labels and map products. Benthic state is broadly decodable: eight channels pass at 10–100 m, led by hard coral (held-out ρ .73 at 10 m, .80 at 50 m); six replicate on nevertrained reefs. A persistence control shows this skill mostly reads stable habitat structure: an annually refreshed structure map, not a continuous ecological monitor. Year-over-year change is decodable only in the two thermal-stress event years, only at 20–50 m, and only at the reef with change ground truth (coral-loss AUC .83 in 2024); quiet-year change sits below the noise floor. Post-registration tests against two independent monitoring archives bound deployment: cover levels transfer at a quarter to a third of inter-programme agreement, but decoded trajectories fail with a directional bias (recolonised surfaces read as coral, so gains rank below chance). Ground-truth reliability caps decodability near ρ .8; naive cross-validation inflates skill by up to +.28. The catalogue and its limits define what these embeddings can and cannot yet contribute to reef monitoring, and how geospatial foundation models should be evaluated against field ecology.

DOI

https://doi.org/10.31223/X50V35

Subjects

Environmental Monitoring, Environmental Sciences, Oceanography, Oceanography and Atmospheric Sciences and Meteorology, Physical Sciences and Mathematics

Keywords

satellite embeddings, coral reefs, benthic mapping, Great Barrier Reef, change detection, validation

Dates

Published: 2026-08-25 14:33

Last Updated: 2026-09-25 06:55

Older Versions

License

CC BY Attribution 4.0 International

Additional Metadata

Conflict of interest statement:
The author is founder and director of OSIBOT PTY LTD, a marine robotics and survey company that hosts the author's PhD@Work candidature and in which intellectual property arising from the candidature vests. OSIBOT has no commercial product based on the methods evaluated here. The author declares no other competing interests.

Metrics

Views: 415

Downloads: 132