Table 5.

Algorithm performance comparison, shown as Pearson’s r² values, for Harsha Lake in Cincinnati, Ohio (Beck et al. 2016) and Taylorsville Lake in Central Kentucky.

Algorithms	HARSHA	TAYLORSVILLE
CASI
CASI CI	0.668	0.678
CASI MCI	0.588	0.481
CASI FLH	0.668	0.678
CASI NDCI	0.687	0.575
CASI 2BDA	0.717	0.658
CASI 3BDA	0.729	0.604
World-View 2
WV2 NDCI	0.724	0.488
WV2 FLH Violet	0.530	0.188
WV2 2BDA	0.711	0.499
WV2 3BDA	0.741	0.442
Sentinel-2
S2 NDCI	0.794	0.698
S2 FLH Violet	0.358	0.228
S2 2BDA	0.799	0.707
S2 3BDA	0.692	0.588
Landsat-8
L8 NDCI	0.125	0.012
L8 SABI	0.123	0.017
L8 FLH Blue	0.381	0.317
L8 FLH Violet	0.548	0.308
L8 2BDA	0.156	0.009
L8 KIVU	0.098	0.100
L8 3BDA	0.158	0.119
MODIS
MODIS NDCI	0.301	0.008
MODIS 2BDA	0.256	0.013
MERIS
MERIS CI	0.841	*
MERIS MCI	0.158	*
MERIS FLH	0.841	*
MERIS NDCI	0.845	*
MERIS 2BDA	0.845	*
MERIS 3BDA	0.832	*

^*The MERIS (Taylorville Lake) configuration only produced three usable water only pixels, which did not meet the minimal requirements to derive an accurate Pearson’s r statistical correlations.