MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1799496414 · doi:10.5558/tfc2013-121

Broadening modern resource inventories: A new protocol for mapping natural and anthropogenic features

2013· article· en· W1799496414 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Guillermo Castilla, Jennifer N. Hird, Bryce Maynes, D. A. Crane, John Cosco, Jim Schieck, Gregory J. McDermid

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing and LiDAR Applications
Canadian institutionsAlberta Biodiversity Monitoring InstituteGovernment of AlbertaUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
FundersGovernment of AlbertaAlberta Biodiversity Monitoring Institute
KeywordsPolygon (computer graphics)SalientProtocol (science)Computer scienceVariety (cybernetics)Resource (disambiguation)Feature (linguistics)Natural (archaeology)Representation (politics)Sample (material)Natural resourceEnvironmental resource managementQuality (philosophy)GeographyEnvironmental scienceArtificial intelligenceEcologyArchaeologyTelecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conventional forests inventories narrowly focus on timber attributes and often neglect other aspects that may be relevant for other purposes. In an effort to broaden the usefulness of these inventories, we introduce a new protocol based on softcopy photo-interpretation for efficiently capturing both natural and anthropogenic features across a variety of landscapes. Salient aspects of this protocol include (1) the combined use of polygon, point and line feature representation; (2) over 50 fields per attribute table; and (3) semi-automated quality control tools. We show an application example over a 3-km by 7-km sample area in central-eastern Alberta.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.005

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicRemote Sensing and LiDAR ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207